^RV  OF  PRI??%^, 
SEP  16  1988 


<^tQGlCAl  Sl\^^^ 


A 


BX  5945  .B9  1849 
Butler,  C.  M.  1810-1890. 
The  Book  of  common  prayer 


BX 
Bu 
Th 


THE 


Boor  of  Common  Prayer, 


INTERPRETED  BY 


Its   History. 


Rev.   C.   M.    BUTLEK,   D.  D., 

PROFESSOH    OF    ECCLESIASTICAL    HISTORY    IN    THE    DIVINITY    SCHOOL,    PHILADELPHIA 

AUTHOR   OF    "lectures  ON   THE   APOCALYPSE;"    "  ST.    PAUL 

IN    ROME,"    ETC.    ETC. 


ScconU  JSTrftion,  Complete. 


PUBLISHED    liY    THE 

PHOTESTAXT    EPISCOPAL    SOCIETY    FOR    THE    Pi;OMOTION 

OF    1:VAX(tEI.ICA1.    KXOAVLEDGE, 

3     BIBLE     HOUSE,     NEW-YOKK. 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Cone^'ess, 

By  C.  M.  BUTLER, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Distriot 

of  Cokimbia. 


,,     (Eoutents 

■■■'  t^-t     ,    V.V^t  ^ 

Advantages  of  Forms  ofPfS^f^ 1 

II. 
Historical  sketch  of  the  Liturgy 23 

III. 
Doctrinal  System  of  the  Church 45 

IV. 

The  Morning  Prayer 69 

V. 
The  Morning  Prayer  (continued) 89 

VI. 

Sundays  and  Holy  Days 106 

VII. 

The  Lord's  Supper 126 

VIII. 

The  Lord's  Supper  (continued) 164 

IX. 

The  Lord's  Supper  (continued) 186 

X. 

The  Lord's  Supper  (continued) 219 

XL 

Infant  Baptism 248 

XII. 
The  Baptismal  Services  and  The  Catechism 278 

XIII. 
Confirmation 305 

XIV. 
Matrimony,  Visitation  of  the  Sick,  &c 322- 

XV. 
The  Articles 344 


^.^Dantagcs  of  loxms  of  JJlraijcr. 


To  attain  the  ends  of  public  worship,  it  is  necessary 
that  we  should  "pray"  both  "with  the  spirit  and  with 
the  understanding."  In  our  public  assemblies  for  the 
worship  of  God  we  should,  therefore,  adopt  such  a 
method  as  is  best  calculated  to  effect  that  object.  The 
Church,  throughout  all  ages,  imitating  Scriptural  exam- 
ple, has  adopted  forms  of  prayer.  That  branch  of  the 
Church  to  which  it  is  our  privilege  to  belong,  by  pro- 
viding for  our  use  that  Liturgy,  Avhose  history,  origin, 
and  doctrine  it  is  my  purpose  briefly  to  unfold,  has  de- 
clared it  her  opinion  that  this  object  is  best  secured  by 
the  use  of  such  a  prescribed  formulary  of  prayer,  as 
shall  both  meet  the  wants  of  the  spirit  and  satisfy  the 
demands  of  the  understanding.  An  examination  of  the 
grounds  of  this  opinion  will  show  it  to  be  firmly  founded. 

It  is  proper  to  remark,  at  the  entrance  upon  this  ex- 
amination, that  the  reasonings  which  may  be  adduced 
in  favor  of  forms  of  prayer  in  general,  will  be  conducted 
with  special  reference  to  the  peculiar  advantages  pos- 
sessed by  our  own  formulary  in  particular,  in  enabling 
1 


!i  ADVANTAGES    OF    FORMS    OF    PRAYER, 

the  worshippers  who  rightly  use  it  to  "pray  with  the 
spirit,  and  with  the  understanding  also." 

That  there  is  such  a  thing  as  praying  with  the  spirit, 
without  the  understanding,  may  be  inferred  from  the 
language  of  St.  Paul.  The  Corinthians,  to  whom  he 
addressed  himself,  might  be  placed  under  such  circum- 
stances as  that,  while  they  could  pray  with  the  spirit,  . 
they  could  not  pray  with  the  understanding.  Coming 
to  their  assemblies  with  the  spirit  of  devotion,  with 
hearts  full  of  penitence,  faith,  and  love,  they  might 
experience  deep  religious  sensibilities  even  during  those 
prayers  which  were  uttered  in  an  unknown  tongue. 
Hearing  the  tones,  and  reading  the  language  of  prayer 
and  praise,  made  visible  by  gesture  and  expression, 
they  might  join  in  spirit  with  the  spirit  of  supplication 
or  of  thanksgiving  which  pervaded  the  assembly.  But 
such  prayer  the  Apostle  considered  imperfect.  It  was 
destitute  of  one  of  the  essential  elements  of  real  wor- 
ship. He  contends  for  the  necessity  of  praying,  not 
with  the  spirit  only,  but  with  the  understanding  also. 
He  would  1  ave  religious  feeling  grow  out  of  the  clear 
perception  and  deep  realization  of  religious  truth. 
Therefore  it  is,  that  he  censures  a  course  of  proceedings 
in  the  religious  assemblies  of  tlie  Corinthians,  which 
tended  to  put  asunder  what  God  had  joined  together. 
St.  Paul  desired  to  see  exhibited  by  his  converts,  not 
the  fluctuating  fervor  of  a  pietism  which  arises  from 
feeling  and  impulse  only,  but  rather  the  bright  and 
steady  flame  of  devotion  which  ever  aspires  heaven- 
ward,— the  blended  homage  of  the  understanding,  the 
conscience,  and  the  heart.     It  is  to  the  production  of 


ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER.        3 

such  a  spirit  of  prayer  that  we  contend  that  forms  of 
prayer  in  general,  and  our  own  in  particular,  are  emi- 
nently adapted. 

I.  It  will  not  be  difficult  to  prove  that  the  possession 
of  a  form  of  prayer  for  the  public  worship  of  God  enables 
those  who  use  it  to  pray  with  the  understanding. 

1.  By  the  use  of  a  form  of  prayer  we  are  secured 
against  presenting  or  joining  in  any  praises  or  petitions 
whose  meaning  we  do  not  understand.  Being  already 
familiar  with  our  forms  before  we  enter  upon  public 
worship,  we  are  not  called  upon  to  join  in,  or  add  our 
"amen"  to  prayers  whose  meanings  have  not  received 
the  deliberate  sanction  of  our  understandings,  as  involv- 
ing right  views  of  the  character  and  government  of  God, 
and  of  the  position,  duty,  and  privilege  of  man.  As  the 
worship  of  our  Liturgy  is  grounded  upon  the  truths  of 
God  as  they  are  generally  set  forth  in  sacred  scripture, 
we  are  not  liable  to  have  our  understanding  perplexed 
and  dissatisfied  by  prayers  and  praises  whose  language 
is  constructed  in  reference  to  controverted  and  difficult 
points  of  doctrine.  It  is  surely  an  essential  condition  of 
true  and  acceptable  worship,  that  the  mind  should  fully 
and  readily  comprehend  the  prayers  which  it  offers  up 
to  God.  But  can  this  essential  condition  be  secured 
when  we  are  called  upon  to  offer  up  our  prayers  in  the 
language  of  another  — language  of  which  we  can  know 
nothing  before  it  is  uttered,  and  which  may  be  based 
upon  or  announce  doctrines,  of  the  truth  of  which  our 
understanding  is  not  satisfied  ? 

2.  While  the  argument  apphes  to  all  classes  of  hear- 


4  ADVANTAGES    OF    FORMS    OF    PRAYER. 

ers,  it  has  peculiar  force  when  viewed  in  reference  to 
the  case  of  the  poor  and  the  uninstructed,  with  a  view 
to  whose  benefit  all  the  parts  of  public  worship  should 
be  particularly  arranged.  The  same  remark  is  appli- 
cable to  another  argument,  which  we  derive  from  the 
style  and  language  of  the  Liturgy. 

The  language  of  our  forms  of  prayer  is  eminently 
perspicuous,  simple,  scriptural,  and  easy  to  be  under- 
stood. "And,"  says  the  Apostle,  "unless  ye  utter  by 
the  tongue  words  easy  to  be  understood,  how  shall  it  be 
known  what  is  spoken  ?  For  ye  shall  speak  unto  the 
air.'"  "For  if  the  trumpet  give  an  uncertain  sound, 
who  shall  prepare  himself  for  the  battle  ?"^  The  lan- 
guage of  the  devotional  portions  of  the  Prayer  Book 
gives  no  uncertain  sound.  It  may  be  comprehended  by 
the  meanest  capacity.  The  precise  meaning  of  all  its 
sentences  is  recognised  at  once.  Its  chaste  and  elo- 
quent beauty  satisfies  the  most  cultivated  taste,  and  its 
transparent  clearness  commends  it  to  the  humblest  un- 
derstanding. It  does  not  deal  in  vague,  exaggerated, 
metaphorical,  mystic  language,  constituting  to  all  but 
the  initiated  an  unknown  tongue,^  It  does  not  wrest  the 
figurative  terms  and  historical  incidents  of  Scripture 
from  their  original  connection  and  signification,  and 
adapt  them  to  new,  remote,  and  conventional  meanings. 

'1  Cor.,xiv.,  9.  2  1  Cor.,  xiv.,  8. 

'  "  There  is  perhaps  a  manner  of  speaking  in  an  unknown  tongue 
even  when  the  language  of  our  own  country  is  used  ;  a  height  of 
composition,  an  abstruseness  of  thought,  an  obscurity  of  phrase, 
which  common  Christians  cannot  understand." — Doddridge  on  1 
Corin.,  xiv. 


ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER.        0 

Not  called  upon  to  put  his  mind  upon  the  search  after 
the  meaning  of  the  petitions  or  praises  which  he  em- 
ploys, the  devout  worshipper  is  enabled,  by  the  use  of 
our  forms,  while  he  prays  with  the  spirit,  to  pray  with 
the  understanding  also. 

3.  The   same  important  object  is  promoted  by  the 
impressive  exhibition  of  Gospel  truth  presented  by  our 
formulary  of  "Common  Prayer."     In  it  are  included 
all  the    melting,  subduing,  uplifting   doctrines  of  the 
cross.     The  sinfulness  of  man,  the  holiness  of  God  and 
his  law,  the  mediation  of  the  Saviour,  the  life-giving 
influences  of  the  Spirit,   are  recognised  and  implied  in 
all  its  offices.     It  is  a  summary  of  Gospel  truth.     There 
we  find  the  blessed  truths  of  God's  Holy  Word,  not  in 
the  lifeless  and  skeleton  form  of  a  system,  but  as  a  liv- 
ing, breathing,  pulsating,  moving  body.     There  they 
are  animated,   as  by  their  heart  and  soul,  with  earnest 
and  glowing  feelings.     Often  repeated  and  meditated, 
as  the  truths  of  the  Gospel  must  be  by  those  who  truly 
join  in  the  worship  of  our  Church,  they  may  become 
thoroughly  understood.     Thus   the   great   doctrines   of 
the  Bible   are  laid  away  in  the  chambers  of  the  under- 
standing, anointed  with  the  fragrant  and  consecrated 
oil  of  holy  feeling,  and  whenever  they  are  brought  forth^ 
the  odor   of    that   ointment    filleth   all   the    building. 
Vividly  does  the  understanding  retain  what  the  heart 
thus  hallows.     The    understanding   may  first  present 
the  truth  to  the  heart ;  but  if  the  conscience  be  quick- 
ened, and  the  heart  moved  by  that  truth,  they  send  it 
back  into  the  understanding  invested  with  a  vividness, 
power,  solemnity,  glory,  which  it  never  possessed  before. 


6        ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER. 

Fervid  feeling  burns  into  the  substance  of  the  under- 
standing the  truths  which  before  were  but  pictured  upon 
its  surface.  The  mode  in  which  religious  truth  is  pre- 
sented in  the  Liturgy  is  thus  found  to  aid  an  intelligent 
devotion  ;  to  be  greatly  instrumental  in  enabling  the 
worshipper  to  pray  with  the  spirit,  it  is  true,  but  with 
the  understanding  also. 

4.  Nor  let  any  think  it  a  matter  of  light  moment  that 
we  should  pray  with  the  understanding.  St.  Paul  did 
not  so  regard  it.  No  one  can  so  regard  it  who  will  con- 
sider what  an  important  influence  prayer  with  the  un- 
derstanding has  upon  prayer  with  the  spirit.  When 
the  understanding  has  calmly  decided  upon  the  duty 
and  the  privilege  of  prayer ;  when  it  has  investigated 
the  grounds  upon  which  the  petitioner  may  hope  for  an 
answer  to  his  supplications  ;  when  it  has  looked  at  the 
weighty  motives  and  glorious  results  of  prayer,  then 
has  the  best  provision  been  made  to  secure  a  steady 
fervency  of  spirit  in  addressing  the  Almighty.  Then, 
when  the  heart  is  pouring  itself  out  in  the  deepest  fervor 
of  penitence  and  love,  its  blessed  current  is  not  checked 
and  chilled  by  the  suggestions  of  an  ill-formed  under- 
standing that  the  grounds  of  its  earnest  emotion  may  be 
all  delusion.  On  the  contrary,  the  calm  decision  of 
the  understanding  is,  that  in  view  of  the  awful  and 
yet  cheering  truths  of  revelation,  the  heart  cannot  and 
will  not  feel  enough.  It  brings  the  momentous  re- 
alities of  eternity  to  bear  upon  the  heart,  and  cries 
shame  upon  it  for  its  coldness  and  indifference.  It 
reasons,  it  expostulates  with  the  sluggish  heart.  It 
says   to   that   blind   heart,  "Can   you   look  on   God's ^ 


ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER.         7 

holy  law,  by  you  violated,  and  not  tremble  ?"  It 
says  to  that  hard  heart,  "  Can  you  look  upon  a  buffeted 
and  bleeding  Saviour,  and  not  mourn  ?''  It  says  to 
that  earthly  heart,  "  Can  you  see  Jesus  at  the  right 
hand  of  God,  your  exalted  High  Priest  and  King,  and 
do  otherwise  than  rejoice  with  joy  unspeakable  and 
full  of  glory  ?"  When  the  understanding  thus  reasons 
with  the  heart,  and  the  heart  feels  in  accordance  with 
the  dictates  of  an  enlightened  understanding,  then  we 
need  not  fear  but  we  shall  be  able  to  pray  with  the 
spirit  and  with  the  understanding  also. 

We  are  thus  led  to  inquire  whether  our  forms  of 
prayer,  which  we  have  found  favorable  to  praying  with 
the  understanding,  be  not  favorable  to  praying  with 
the  spirit,  also. 

II.  What  is  to  pray  with  the  spirit  ?  It  is  to  have 
permitted  access  to  the  mercy-seat  of  God.  It  is  to 
have  a  realized  communion  with  the  Father  of  our 
spirits.  It  is  to  have  the  soul  abstracted  from  the 
things  of  time  and  sense,  and  intently  absorbed  in  high 
and  holy  fellowship  with  the  Invisible.  To  pray  with 
the  spirit,  is  to  have  the  heart  abased  in  penitence 
when  the  hps  are  confessing  sin  ;  to  have  it  touched 
with  rapture  at  the  utterance  of  praise  ;  to  have  it  thirst 
and  long  for  grace  upon  the  pouring  forth  of  supplication. 

1.  The  first  and  indispensable  requisite  for  praying 
with  the  spirit — we  speak  now,  of  course,  of  public 
prayer,  in  which  a  whole  congregation  unite — is  that 
the  language  be  adapted  to  produce  and  express  such 
sentiments  and  emotions.     The  language  of  our  Liturgy 


O  ADVANTAGES    OF    FORMS    OF    PRATER. 

is,  we  think,  adapted  to  this  end.  Its  confessions  of 
sinfulness  and  of  sin  are  full  and  deprecating,  embody- 
ing the  very  spirit  of  that  self-abasing  penitence  accept- 
able to  God,  which  exclaims,  "God  be  merciful  to  me 
a  sinner  !"  Its  prayers  for  holiness  of  heart  and  life 
breathe  a  spirit  of  such  earnest  sincerity,  and  are  ex- 
pressive of  so  true  a  yearning  for  high  attainments  in 
the  Christian  life,  as  can  be  fully  sympathized  with 
only  by  those  who  are  spiritually-minded  and  alienated 
from  the  world.  Its  anthems  of  praise  are  the  out- 
pourings and  ascendings  of  a  sense  of  gratitude  which 
ascribes  to  God  all  the  glory  of  man's  renovation  and 
salvation.  Its  supplications  for  all  orders  and  de- 
grees of  men  manifest  wide  and  catholic  love  for  all 
mankind.  They  are  general,  without  coldness,  and 
minute,  without  offensive  specification.  That  they  are 
adapted  to  the  expression  of  our  deepest  religious  feel- 
ings, may  be  proved  by  an  appeal  to  the  consciousness 
and  experience  of  those  who  have  rightly  and  devoutly 
used  them.  To  such  we  put  these  questions,  with  no 
doubtfulness  of  the  answer.  When  you  are  in  the  great 
congregation,  under  any  peculiar  circumstances  which 
have  awakened  your  religious  sensibilities,  do  you  not 
find  these  forms  fitted  to  express  those  feelings  ?  Have 
you,  under  such  circumstances,  ever  been  so  deeply 
penitent  for  your  sins,  so  cast  down  in  utter  self-abase- 
ment, that  the  words  of  this  book  were  not  fully  equal  to 
the  expression  of  that  penitence  ?  Have  you  ever 
so  magnified  Christ  in  your  heart  as  your  Saviour  and' 
your  King,  as  that  its  hymns  of  praise  failed  to  give 
to  your  feelings   full  and   satisfying   utterance  ?     Has 


ADVANTAGES    OF    FORMS    OF    PRAYER.  9 

the  Spirit  ever  so  comforted  and  blessed  your  soul,  as 
that  its  grateful  words  proved  insufficient  to  express 
your  thankfulness  ?  Rather  have  you  not  found  that 
they  are  cold  only  when  you  are  cold,  that  they  are 
formal  only  when  you  are  formal  ?  We  are  confident 
that  you  will  reply,  that  instead  of  desiring  to  drop  the 
language  of  the  Liturgy,  as  inadequate  to  express  your 
feelings  when  awakened  or  sublimed,  you  have  looked 
to  it  and  clung  to  it  as  the  only  fit  vehicle  of  expressing 
the  emotions  burning  and  beating  at  your  heart,  and 
said  to  it, 

"  Lend,  lend  your  wings  !" 

And  when  lifted  up  on  its  soaring  praises,   and  borne 

towards  heaven's  gate  on  the  wings  of  its  importunate 

supplications,  you  have  been  able  to  exclaim, 

"I  mount!  I  fly!" 

2.  By  the  use  of  our  forms  of  prayer  we  are  enabled 
to  pray  with  the  spirit  in  the  public  worship  of  God, 
because  such  forms  are  best  adapted  to  give  expression 
to  those  general  wants,  feelings,  -confessions,  and  sup- 
plications which  are  in  common  experienced  by,  and 
appropriate  to,  sinful  humanity.  We  meet  in  the  sanc- 
tuary of  God  for  common  and  united  prayer.  Our  Liturgy 
secures  us  alike  against  the  incompetency  and  the  vary- 
ing feelings  of  individuals.  We  are  always  provided 
with  language  fitted  for  its  object.  We  enter  the  house 
of  God  in  full  confidence  that  our  prayers  will  be  pre- 
sented before  the  throne  in  language  sober,  reverent, 
and  fervent,  embodying  all  we  feel,  all  we  need,  and  all 
we  desire.     Without  such  security,  we  may  be  exposed 


10       ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER. 

to  have  many  of  our  deepest  feelings  and  most  earnestly 
realized  wants  unexpressed.  If  he  whose  duty  it  is  to 
lead  the  devotions  of  the  people,  were  incompetent  to 
present  them  fully  and  fervently,  the  service  would 
prove  unedifying  and  unsatisfactory.  If  otherwise  com- 
petent, his  devotional  feelings  would  be  liable,  as  all 
men's  are,  to  become  at  times  cold  and  stupid,  and  he 
would  then  sometimes  offer  up  hesitating,  heartless,  and 
formal  prayers.  And  if,  from  temperament  or  educa- 
tion, or  any  other  cause,  he  was  one  who  gave  undue 
prominence  to  any  particular  class  of  duties  or  of  doc- 
trines, such  a  peculiarity  would  be  manifested  in  his 
public  prayers.  If,  then,  the  chastened  fervor  and  ful- 
ness of  our  forms  be  not  favorable  to  the  production  of 
the  fever-fits  of  devotion,  neither  do  they  allow  the  soul 
to  be  seized  upon  and  prostrated  by  its  deadly  chills.  If 
the  soul,  under  their  moulding  and  shaping  influence, 
may  not  exhibit  exaggerated  development  in  some  of  its 
forms,  at  the  expense  of  a  puny  growth  in  others,  it 
may  yet  gi-adually  assume,  under  their  equal  pressure, 
a  form  of  symmetry  and  beauty  remotely  assimilated  to 
that  of  our  divine  Exemplar! 

3.  Again:  by  our  forms  of  prayer  we  are  secured 
against  another  impediment  to  praying  with  the  spirit, 
which  we  must  always  be  liable  to  encounter  without 
them.  We  are  not  under  the  necessity  of  having  prayers 
offered  up  in  which  we  cannot  in  conscience  or  consist- 
ency engage.  And,  at  the  present  day,  when  a  spirit 
of  sincere  but  misguided  benevolence  would  convert  the 
Church  of  the  living  God  into  an  agency  for  the  further- 
ance of  other  and  lesser  objects  than  the  salvation  of 


ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYKR.       11 

the  souls  of  men,  objects  concerning  the  necessity  or 
excellence  of  which  there  are  wide  differences  of  opin- 
ion, this  is  a  matter  of  no  light  importance.  Nor  is  this 
an  imaginary  impediment.  It  not  unfrequently  happens 
that  he  who  leads  the  devotions  of  an  assembly  of  wor- 
shippers who  use  no  forms,  maybe  so  deeply  persuaded 
of  the  excellence  of  a  cause  in  which  his  affections  are 
engaged,  as  to  pray  long  and  earnestly  for  the  further- 
ance of  an  object  whose  success  he  accounts  a  blessing 
greatly  to  be  desired;  while  many  of  the  congregation 
regard  the  object  as  chimerical,  pernicious,  or  unjust. 
How,  under  such  circumstances,  can  a  congregation 
offer  up  united  prayer?  How  can  they  pray  with  the 
spirit  and  with  the  understanding?  Let  us  as  churchmen 
be  thankful  that  we  are  not  exposed  to  such  violent  inter- 
ruptions to  our  devotional  feelings.  We  are  sure  that 
there  are  no  petitions  or  praises  in  our  service  in  which  a 
Christian  cannot  join.  We  are  sure  that  there  will  be  no 
phrases  in  that  service  consecrated  to  a  system  or  a  sect, 
the  arousing  watchwords  which  wake,  even  in  the  house 
of  God,  the  hateful  spirit  of  partisanship  and  strife.  We 
are  familiar  with  all  its  words,  and  are  not  called  upon 
to  exercise  the  discrimination  of  the  understanding  when 
we  would  pour  forth  the  feelings  of  our  hearts!  The 
soul  flows  on  in  its  accustomed  channel,  now  dark  and 
deep  under  the  shadows  of  penitence;  now  the  mirror 
of  heaven  in  its  tranquillity;  now  murmuring  grateful 
praise,  and  sparkling  in  the  sunshine  of  joy,  and  not 
liable  to  meet  obstructions  against  which  it  must  chafe, 
rage,  and  foam!^ 

*  That  the  evils  of  extemporary  forms  of  worship — for  fonns  all 
must  have,  and  the  choiccis  only  between  good  ones  and  poor  ones 


12  ADVANTAGES    OF    FORMS    OF    PRAYER. 

4.  But  we  take  higher  ground  on  this  subject.  We 
contend  that  forms  of  prayer  are  demanded  by  the  wants 
of  our  mental  and  moral  nature,  and  that  those  wants 
are  fully  satisfied  only  by  such  a  provision  as  is  made 
in  our  Liturgy. 

As  social  beings,  we  crave,  and  love  to  express,  and 
hear  expressed,  sympathy  and  affection.  All  our  feel- 
ings are  deepened  by  being  shared  and  mutually  ex- 
pressed. True  as  the  remark  is  in  reference  to  all 
human  feelings,  it  is  pre-eminently  true  of  religious 
feeling.  It  delights  in  sympathy.  Sympathy  is  the 
breath  which  fans  it  into  flame.    Hearts  melted  by  holy 

— are  beginning  to  be  felt  by  those  who  use  them,  is  evident  from 
several  indications.  From  the  preface  of  "The  Service  Book  for 
the  Use  of  the  Church  of  the  Disciples," — an  Unitarian  congrega- 
tion who  meet  in  the  Masonic  Temple,  Boston — the  following 
passage  is  taken  as  evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  remark  :  "  Seeing 
advantages  in  the  forms  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  in  the  silent  wor- 
ship of  the  Q,uaker,  in  the  congregational  singing  of  the  Lutheran 
and  Methodist,  and  in  the  extempore  prayer  usual  in  our  New 
England  churches,  we  have  endeavored  to  blend  them  together  in 
liturgic  forms  which  shall  be  at  once  rich  and  free,  avoiding  the 
extremes  of  barrenness  and  poverty  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  stiff 
formality  on  the  other.  We  have  allowed  in  these  services  ample 
room  for  variety."  Perhaps  if  so  ample  room  had  not  been  allowed 
for  variety,  there  might  have  been  a  remedy  in  this  Unitarian  wor- 
ship for  the  fatal  necessity  imposed  by  the  theory  of  the  Unitarian 
congregational  discipline,  for  the  minister  who  composed  this  form 
to  admit  to  his  pulpit  the  avowed  infidel,  Theodore  Parker.  If 
these  liturgic  forms  had  not  been  at  once  so  "  rich  and  free,"  Mr. 
Parker  might  not  have  been  willing  to  have  used  a  form  of  worship 
which  treated  the  Scriptures  as  not  made  up  of  fables,  and  the  Sa- 
viour as  at  least  as  good  a  reformer  as  we  have  yet  had,  or  have 
reason  to  expect. 


ADVANTAGES    OF    FORMS    OF    PRAYER.  13 

feeling  are  attracted  towards  and  blend  with  each  other. 
When  this  is  the  case,  how  pleasant  it  is  with  united 
hearts  and  voices  to  praise  and  pray!  We  find  this  want 
and  feeling  expressed  in  some  assemblies  of  Christians 
by  audible  exclamations,  indicative  of  sympathy  and 
assent  with  those  who  lead  the  prayers  and  praises  of 
the  congregation.  Our  Liturgy  has  admirably  provided 
for  this  social  feeling  of  the  heart  by  an  arrangement 
which  calls  upon  the  people  to  add  their  loud  "rtwicn/" 
or  their  responsive  thanksgiving  or  supplication  to  those 
which  are  uttered  by  the  officiating  minister.''  Nor  only 
so.  This  social  feeling,  softening  and  affecting  as  it  is 
when  experienced  in  reference  to  those  who  worship 
under  the  same  consecrated  roof,  becomes  sublime  and 
elevating  when  it  breaks  abroad  beyond  the  precincts 
of  the  Church  in  which  it  is  awakened,  and  takes  in  its 
warm  grasp  all  in  distant  and  separated  places,  who  are 
occupied  in  worshipping  God  with  the  same  prayers  and 
praises.  It  makes  us  imperfectly  to  realize  the  commu- 
nion of  the  saints,  when  we  reflect  that  earth  is  almost 
encircled  by  a  continuous  echoed  strain  of  our  pleading 
Litanies  and  exulting  Doxologies.  It  unites  us  with  the 
saints  of  all  ages,  and  with  the  church  triumphant  in 
Heaven,  when  we  remember  that  some  of  the  language 
which  we  employ  has  conveyed  consolation  to  the  hearts 
of  Apostles  and  holy  men;  some  has  expressed  the  de- 

*  The  people  echo  out  amen,  like  a  thunder-clap,  says  St.  Jerome. 
And  Clemens  Romanus,  "  We  raise  ourselves  on  our  tip-toes  at 
this  last  acclamation  of  our  prayers,  as  if  we  desired  that  the  word 
should  carry  up  our  bodies  as  well  as  our  souls  to  Heaven." — H. 
L'Estrange's  Alliance  of  Divine  Offices,  p.  76. 


14       ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER. 

votion  of  pious  hearts  through  succeeding  ages;  some 
has  trembled  on  the  lips  of  expiring  martyrs;  some  is 
ascending,  in  the  temple  not  made  with  hands,  to  the 
Lamb  that  was  slain.  0,  how  poor,  though  breathing 
all  the  fervor  of  a  true  devotion,  are  prayers  and  praises,, 
which  are  destitute  of  this  rich  provision  for  the  wants 
of  our  moral  nature.*^ 

5.  But  it  is  sometimes  said  that  it  is  impossible  to 
express  the  feelings  of  the  heart  in  forms  of  prayer ; 

®The  preeminently  wise  Lord  Bacon,  in  his  "Certain  Consider- 
ations touching  the  better  Purification  and  Edification  of  the  Church 
of  England,"  in  describing  such  a  Liturgy  as  a  sound  judgment  de- 
mands for  worship,  includes  a  provision  for  this  social  feeling  of 
he  heart.  His  words,  indeed,  describe  our  Liturgy  as  it  is,  though 
they  seem  to  imply  that  the  form  should  not  be  absolutely  and 
unchangeably  binding. 

"So  as  none,  I  suppose,  of  sound  judgment  will  derogate  from 
the  Liturgy,  if  the  form  thereof  be  in  all  parts  agreeable  to  the 
Word  of  God,  the  example  of  the  primitive  Church,  and  that  holy 
decency  which  St.  Paul  commendeth.  And,  therefore,  first,  that 
there  be  a  set  form  of  prayer,  and  that  it  be  not  left  to  an  extem- 
poral  form,  or  to  an  arbitrary  form.  Secondly,  that  it  consists  as 
well  of  lauds,  hymns,  and  thanksgivings,  as  of  petitions,  prayers, 
and  supplications.  Thirdly,  that  the  form  thereof  be  quickened  by 
some  shortness  and  diversities  of  prayers  and  hymns,  and  with 
some  interchanges  of  the  voices  of  the  people  as  well  as  of  the 
minister.  Fourthly,  that  it  admit  some  distinction  of  times  and 
commemorations  of  God's  principal  benefits,  as  well  general  as 
particular.  Fifthly,  that  prayers,  likewise,  be  appropriated  to 
several  necessities  and  occasions  of  the  Church.  Sixthly,  that 
there  be  a  form,  likewise,  of  words  and  Liturgy  in  the  administra- 
tion of  the  sacraments,  and  in  denouncing  of  the  censures  of  the 
Church,  and  other  holy  actions  and  solemnities." 

Lord  Bacon's  Works,  vol.  ii,  p.  426. 


ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER.        15 

that  their  use  inevitably  induces  coldness,  formality, 
and  hypocrisy.  It  is  objected  that  feelings  so  deep  and 
fervent,  as  are  those  of  the  real  Christian,  disdain  the 
trammels  of  a  prescribed  service,  and  find  adequate  ex- 
pression only  in  the  outpourings  of  spontaneous,  unpre- 
meditated prayer.'  Let  us  examine  this  objection.  Let 
us  see  if  it  be  true  that  human  nature  rejects  a  form  of 
words  for  the  expression  of  its  deeper  and  holier  feelings. 
It  was  thought  to  have  been  a  striking  observation, 
''Give  me  the  making  of  a  people's  songs,  and  I  care 
not  who  makes  its  laws."  The  observation  proceeded 
from  a  deep  knowledge  of  human  nature.  It  implied 
that  he  who  can  give  popular  expression  to  the  feelings 
of  patriotism  and  affection — he  who  can  place  in  every 
man's  hand  an  instrument  through  which  the  vaguely 
struggling  impulses  of  his  heart  can  find  expression, 
wields  an  influence  in  the  formation  of  a  nation's  char- 

'This  objection  has  never  been  better  or  more  wittily  answered 
than  by  Samuel  Wesley. 

"  Form  stints  y  spirit,  Watts  has  said, 

And  therefore  oft  is  wrong; 

At  best  a  crutch  the  weak  to  aid, 

A  cumbrance  to  the  strong. 

Old  David,  both  in  prayer  and  praise, 

A  form  of  crutches  brings  ; 
But  Watts  has  dignified  his  lays, 

And  furnished  him  with  wings. 

E'en  Watts  a  form  for  praise  can  use. 

For  prayer  who  throws  it  by ; 
Crutches  to  walk  he  can  refuse, 

But  uses  them  to  fly. ^' 

[Whitehead's  Life  of  Weslexj,  p.  68. 


16       ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER. 

acter  mightier  than  that  of  legislators  and  laws.  It  pro- 
ceeded on  the  supposition  that  the  human  mind  needs, 
seeks,  and  loves  such  a  vehicle  for  its  deepest  emotions 
as  commends  itself  to  the  sympathies  of  our  common 
nature,  and  is  expressive  of  the  feelings  of  universal 
humanity.  And  it  will  be  found  that  the  more  frequently 
any  vehicle  for  the  expression  of  feeling  is  used,  the 
dearer  does  it  become.  The  deepest  emotions  will  find 
fittest  utterance  in  the  words  which  have  most  frequently 
expressed  them.  All  that  is  sacred  and  affecting  in  the 
past,  comes  and  clothes  the  language  which  gives  utter- 
ance to  the  wants  or  feelings  of  the  present.  Hence, 
the  enthusiasm  w^hich  gathers  about  those  national  songs 
through  which  the  awakened  patriotism  of  a  people  has 
burst  forth  in  frequent  and  earnest  expression.  Hence, 
the  exile  from  his  native  hills  will  weep  when  he  hears 
the  songs  of  his  country,  as  they  come  to  his  ear  laden 
with  the  memory  of  happy  days.  For  the  expression 
of  casual  and  passing  feelings,  new  and  lighter  lays, 
which  have  no  old  associations,  may  suffice.  But  when 
the  heart  is  stirred  to  its  foundations,  it  likes  not  novelty 
of  expression.  It  asks  for  the  old  words  and  the  old 
tunes.     The  language  of  universal  humanity  is, 

"  Sing  aloud 
Old  songs,  the  precious  music  of  the  heart !" 

Every  where  and  always,  it  is  found  that  the  deepest 
emotions  of  the  human  soul  are  best  expressed  in  those 
fervid  words,  around  which  seem  to  linger  something  of 
holy  enthusiasm  from  all  the  hearts  which  they  have 
successively  touched  and  thrilled. 

But  here  is  a  marvellous  thing!     When  we  seek  a  fit 


ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER.        17 

expression  for  those  feelings  which  are  deeper  than 
love,  and  stronger  than  patriotism;  when  we  would  find 
words  to  convey  the  rapture  of  pardon,  the  gladness  of 
gratitude,  the  joy  of  love,  the  triumph  of  faith,  the  sor- 
row of  penitent  humiliation,  we  are  told  to  discard  this 
principle.  For  the  expression  of  the  deepest  and  most 
solemn  feelings  of  which  the  human  soul  is  susceptible, 
we  are  told  that  unconsidered  words,  spoken  from  the 
sudden  promptings  of  the  heart,  are  the  best  vehicles. 
Can  it  be  so?  Is  nature  so  variable  in  her  teachings? 
Is  God  so  unstable  in  his  laws?  Shall  w^e  find  that  a 
principle,  estabUshed  by  God,  ceases  to  operate  just  at 
that  point  where,  from  all  analogy  and  all  observation, 
we  should  expect  to  observe  its  most  perfect  operation? 
When  we  would  oflfer  adoration  and  prayer,  is  it  no  in- 
citement to  our  devotional  feehngs  that  the  language 
we  use  was  uttered  by  holy  men  of  old,  consecrated  by 
ages,  and  spoken  by  the  same  household  of  faith  in 
many  lands?  When  we  would  emulate  q.  martyr's  faith, 
is  it  no  aid  to  us  to  use  a  martyr's  prayer?  When  we 
would  express  our  gratitude  and  praise  to  the  Almighty, 
and  glorify  Christ  because  of  the  glory  which  he  had 
with  the  Father  Tefore  the  world  was,  and  because  of 
his  condescension  and  love  in  man's  redemption,  shall 
we  not  send  our  souls  upward  upon  that  triumphant 
"  Te  Deum,^'  on  whose  wings  so  many  Christians  have 
ascended  and  skirted  the  battlements  of  heaven,  and 
caught  over  them  bright  glimpses  of  the  paradise  of 
God?  Truly,  if  our  hearts  are  right  towards  God  and 
man,  then  when  we  use  our  forms  we  may  adopt  the 


18       ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER. 

Apostle's  language,  "  I  will  pray  with  the  spirit,  and  I 
will  pray  with  the  understanding  also."® 

Such  are  some  of  the  grounds  on  which  we  feel,  that 
by  the  use  of  forms  of  prayer,  we  can  best  render  that 
true  devotion,  which  consists  in  offering  up  those  praises 
and  petitions,  which  the  heart  embraces  as  it  receives 
them  from  the  understanding.  Let  us,  then,  as  church- 
men, and  as  Christians,  realize  the  obligations  which 
are  laid  upon  us  by  the  possession  of  our  treasured 
Liturgy.  Let  us  show  forth  to  the  world,  by  lives  emi- 
nently blameless  and  devoted,  that  we  make  earnest 
and  diligent  use  of  our  blessed  privileges.  It  does  not 
become  us  to  be  ever  marching  with  boastful  banners, 
around  the  walls  of  our  spiritual  Zion,  marking  with 
proud  satisfaction  her  impregnable  bulwarks,  and  count- 
ing with  elated  heart  her  lofty  towers.  It  becomes  us 
to  kneel  in  penitence  at  her  altars.  It  becomes  us  to  fill 
her  courts  with  the  incense  of  true  devotion,  and  to  offer 

*•  The  same  thought  is  found  admirably  expressed  in  Dr.  Coit's 
excellent  sermon  on  forms  of  prayer,  "  Fault-finders  with  Litur- 
gies have  insensibly  adopted  the  unfortunate  mistake  that  prayer  is 
an  exercise  for  the  head  rather  than  for  the  heart,  and  must,  there- 
fore, exhibit  incessant  variety.  It  is  not  true,  as  a  fact,  that  the 
heart  covets  or  loves  that  variety  which  is  (by  some)  presumed  to 
be  indispensable  to  fervent  worship.  The  heart,  the  affections,  love 
unchangeable  things,  love  old  things,  love  things  which  endure,  like 
the  hills  of  earth  and  the  stars  of  heaven.  Few  understand  the  deep 
philosophy  as  well  as  benevolence  of  the  Church  in  her  provision 
for  the  service  of  God's  house.  In  the  chancel,  she  gives  the  heai-t 
what  it  loves — sameness  ;  in  the  pulpit,  she  gives  what  the  head  de- 
lights in — variety;  thus  providing  for  all  the  wants  of  our  craving 
and  exacting  nature." 


ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER.       19 

up  the  acceptable  sacrifice  of  a  contrite  and  consecrated 
heart.  It  becomes  us  to  remember  that  the  forms  of 
devotion  may  remain  in  their  purity  when  the  spirit  of 
devotion  shall  have  fled.  Symmetiy  and  loveliness  may 
linger  in  the  lifeless  corpse.  The  walls  may  remain 
without  a  breach,  and  the  gleaming  turrets  may  lift 
themselves  in  the  sunshine,  from  a  silent  Necropolis — 
a  city  of  the  dead!  Let  us  not  be  high-minded,  but 
fear! 

It  is  difficult  for  us  to  estimate  the  debt  of  gratitude 
which  our  Church  owes  to  her  forms  of  prayer.  That 
the  Church  has  hitherto  been  enabled  to  maintain  unity 
of  faith  on  the  fundamental  points  of  doctrine,  may  be 
due  less  to  our  formularies  of  faith  than  to  our  forms  of 
devotion.  If  that  unity  is  to  be  continued,  it  is,  I  ap- 
prehend, to  be  effected,  not  so  much  by  entire  harmony 
of  sentiment  upon  the  exp/anatio7is  of  creeds  and  arti- 
cles, as  it  is  by  a  heart-felt  unity  of  spirit  in  the  use  of 
our  Scriptural  forms  of  prayer.  Perhaps  thei;e  never 
was  a  period  in  the  history  of  our  Church,  when  the 
value  of  her  devotional  services  was  put  to  a  severer 
test  or  received  a  more  triumphant  demonstration,  than 
at  the  present  time.  United  prayers  may  be  twined 
into  soft  and  silken  bonds,  which  shall  hold  in  lovinsr 
and  unforced  unity,  those  who,  if  they  were  bound  to 
gether  only  by  the  iron  fetters  of  articles  and  confes- 
sions, would  snap  them  asunder,  and  assault  each  other 
with  their  broken  fragments.  What  degree  of  blessing 
in  answer  to  the  prayers  of  those  who  have  prayed  with 
the  spirit,  and  with  the  understanding,  has  descended 
upon  Churches  and  individuals,  eternity  will  disclose  ! 


20       ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER. 

Let  US,  then,  faithfully  improve  the  privileges  which 
we  enjoy  by  means  of  our  Common  Prayer.  We  shall 
never  know  its  value  until  our  hearts  go  up  on  its  devo- 
tional words  'vvith  something  of  the  fervor  and  faith  with 
which  those  by  whom  they  were  framed  ascended. 
What  a  change  might  be  made  to  come  over  our  be- 
loved Church,  if  we  would  but  heed  one  of  her  briefest 
rubrics, — Let  us  pray  ?  Great  things  are  promised  to 
united  prayer.  We  should  seek  them.  We  should 
expect  them.  In  our  public  services  we  should  pray 
as  those  who  are  addressing  a  present  God  ;  as  those 
who  unfalteringly  believe  that  he  hears  and  answers 
prayer.  Shall  thousands  of  worshippers,  prostrate  at 
once  in  prayer,  pour  out  with  united  hearts  and 
voices  her  humble  confessions,  her  solemn  vows  and 
her  burning  praises,  and  no  large  blessings  follow  ? 
Shall  neither  Churches,  ministers,  nor  members,  re- 
ceive grace  and  strength  ?  Shall  not  the  careless  be 
awakened,  the  lukewarm  enlivened,  the  doubting  and 
the  distressed  be  cheered  ?  Has  God  forgotten  to  be 
gracious  ?  Is  his  ear  heavy  that  it  cannot  hear  ?  Is 
his  arm  shortened  that  it  cannot  save  ?  No.  God 
hears  ;  but  do  we  pray  ?  It  is  not  prayer  to  follow  with 
tne  eye,  or  ear,  or  lip,  the  words  of  supplication. 

"  Prayer  is  the  soul's  sincere  desire, 
Unaltered  or  expressed  !" 

Let  us  pray  !  The  sins  of  our  own  souls  are  grievous 
to  be  borne  ;  the  aid  of  the  Spirit  must  be  constantly 
extended  to  us,  or  we  cannot  keep  out  of  perdition  ; 
sinners  are  falling  into  eternal  death  ;  the  darkened 
nations  of  the  earth  are  throwing  wide  their  doors,  and 


AnVANTAGES    OF    FORMS    OF    PRAYER.  21 

raising  the  Macedonian  cry  for  our  prayers,  our  sym- 
pathy, and  our  aid  !     Let  us  pray !     When  the  members 
of  our  Churches  shall  have  learned  to  prepare,  in  private 
devotion,  for  public  worship  as  for  one  of  their  highest 
privileges  and  most  sacred  duties  ;  when  they  shall  all 
come   duly  at  the  appointed  hour,  so  that  nothing  shall 
mar  the  hushed  solemnity  of  the  sacred  service  ;  when 
they  shall  realize  that  the  Lord  is  in  his  holy  temple, 
and  that  it  is  none  other  than   the  house  of  God,  and 
truly  the  gate  of  heaven  ;  when  they  shall  feel  it  to  be 
a   fearful  thing  to  allow   their  minds   to  wander  when 
they  are  professedly  addressing  the  Lord  God  Almighty; 
when  they  shall  speak  aloud  the  responsive  service, 
and  allow  the  intonations  of  the   voice  to  give  expres- 
sion to,  and  deepen  the  emotions  of,  the  heart ;  when 
the  heart  shall  be  prepared  to  utter  with  true  feeling 
every    spoken  word,  then  will  the  frivolous  and   the 
worldly  be  made  to  feel  that  God  is  in   his  sanctuary  ; 
then  will  the  Church  throw  off  the  spirit  of  heaviness, 
and  be  clothed  with  the  garments  of  praise  ;  then  will 
he  who  leads  the  devotions  of  the  people,  no  longer 
be  subjected  to  the  charge  of  a  dull,  uninterested,  or 
formal  discharge  of  the  duties  of  his  sacred  office,  but 
it  wiU  be  with  a  beating  heart  and  fervid  voice  that  he 
will  besiege  the  throne  of  grace,  leading  in  the  van, 
and  speaking  in  the  name  of  earnest  and  urgent  sup- 
plicants. 

And,  finally,  let  us  remember  that  out  of  the  house  of 
God  there  is  a  transcript  of  the  pages  of  our  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  known  and  read  of  all  men.  It  is 
spread  out   to  the  world's  easy  perusal,  and  in  their 


22       ADVANTAGES  OF  FORMS  OF  PRAYER. 

busiest  hours  men  will  catch  and  read  some  passages. 
Our  lives  and  conversations  will  be  read  as  the  living 
transcripts  of  that  volume  by  those  who  never  open  its 
pages.  Oh!  that  they  may  see  and  be  won  to  the  ac- 
knowledgment that  as  that  volume  is  but  the  Word  of 
God  converted  into  prayer,  so  our  lives  are  but  the 
exhibition  of  that  prayer,  transcribed  in  our  practice, 
and  realized  in  our  life  !  May  they  see  in  us  its  hal- 
lowed meekness,  its  realizing  faith,  its  ardent  love  ! 


II. 


i^istcrual  Skctil)  of  lljc  Citurgw. 


It  is  no  part  of  the  design  of  these  chapters  upon 
the  history  and  doctrines  of  the  Book  of  Common  Pray- 
er, to  give  an  account  of  the  causes  and  progress  of 
the  Reformation.  A  general  knowledge  of  that  great 
event  must  be  supposed.  Nevertheless,  a  very  slight 
sketch  of  the  progress  of  religious  opinion  during  the 
reign  of  Henry  VIII,  and  an  account  of  the  publication 
of  several  religious  documents  during  the  same  period, 
seem  necessary  to  a  full  history  of  the  Liturgy. 

Very  little  progress  towards  purity  of  doctrine  was 
made  during  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  Nevertheless, 
preparation  for  progress  had  been  made.  In  casting 
off  the  supremacy  of  the  pope,  in  translating  the  Word 
of  God,  in  ceasing  to  offer  public  prayer  in  an  unknown 
tongue,  measures  had  been  taken,*  under  which  sprang 
up  the  strong  and  irrepressible  spirit  of  free  inquiry. 
Knowledge  of,  and  contact  with,  the  Lutheran  Reforma- 
tion, had  convinced  many  minds  that  the  claims  of  the 
Romish  Church  to  purity  of  doctrine  were  as  ground- 
less as  her  scouted  pretensions  to  universality  of  power. 
Notwithstanding,  therefore,  that  Henry  started  back  at 


24  HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY. 

the  rush  and  roar  of  the  stream  of  public  opinion  for 
which  his  own  hand  had  opened  the  channel  ;  notwith- 
standing that  just  before  the  termination  of  his  reign  all 
the  essential  errors  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  with  the 
exception  of  the  supremacy  of  the  pope,  were  establish- 
ed by  the  Six  Articles;  notwithstanding  that  the  ])opish 
party,  favored  by  the  king,  were  in  the  full  ascendant; 
yet  Protestantism,  in  seclusion,  meditation,  and  prayer, 
was  preparing  for  high  achievement  and  marked  suc- 
cess. But  as  yet  there  was  only  preparation.  In  the 
language  of  Hooper,  "  The  king  cast  out  the  pope,  not 
popery." '  In  tracing,  therefore,  the  history  of  our 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  we  should  expect  to  find, 
correspondently  with  the  progress  of  religious  know- 
ledge, but  little  actually  accomplished,  during  the  reign 
of  Henry  VIII.,  towards  the  formation  of  a  pure  for- 
mulary of  public  worship  ;  while  at  the  same  time,  we 
should  look  for  evidence  that  such  preparation  had  been 
made  for  a  purer  worship  as  needed  but  a  propitious 
time  to  be  matured  into  a  spiritual  and  holy  ritual. 

The  first  step  towards  the  reformation  of  the  worship 
of  the  English  Church  was  the  publication  of  the  King's 
Primer.  It  was  published  apparently  without  the  royal 
approbation  in  1535,  the  same  year  in  which  the  pope 
excommunicated  Henry  and  his  adherents.  It  consists 
of  various  tracts,  then  first  collected  in  one  volume.* 

'  Cardwell's  Two  Liturgies  of  Edward  compared,  p.  6. 

'Stripe's  Memorials,  vol.  i,  p.  217. 

Shepherd's  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, p.  ii. 


HISTORICAL   SKETCH   OP   THE   LITtJRGY.  25 

After  passing  through  a  variety  of  editions,  it  was 
published,  by  authority,  in  the  year  1545.  "The  ob- 
ject of  its  publication  was  to  furnish  the  unlearned  with 


The  following  abstract  of  the  Primer  of  1535  is  taken  from 
Shepherd  :  "  The  larger  editions,  after  the  preface,  began  with  an 
exposition  of  the  commandments,  another  of  the  creed  and  a  confession, 
wherein  all  are  directed  to  examine  their  lives  by  the  rule  of  the  com- 
mandments. These  are  followed  by  two  pious  and  judicious  tracts, 
entitled,  Directions  concei-ning  Prayer  and  Jin  Exposition  of  the  Lord's 
Prayer ;  a  caution  concerning  the  use  of  the  ^ive  JMaria,  or  the 
angePs  salutation,  with  a  prayer  to  our  Creator  ;  prayers  for  Bishops 
and  rulers,  for  husbands  and  wives,  Sfc,  or  an  office  for  all  states  ;  a 
tract  on  good  works,  and  an  exhortation  to  expect  the  cross,  and  to  bear 
it  patiently.  Then  follow  matins,  lauds,  evenso'iig,  &c.  After  these 
stand  the  seven  penitential  psalms,  and  the  Litany,  different  copies  of 
which,  in  different  editions,  vary  almost  as  much  from  each  other 
as  some  of  them  do  from  our  present  form.  After  the  Litany,  is 
a  contemplation  07i  Psalms  li  ;  a  prayer  to  our  Saviour  ;  the  history  of 
Christ's  Passion,  taken  from  the  Gospels,  and  divided  into  ten  sec- 
tions ;  a  practical  discourse  on  the  Passion  ;  instruction  for  children  ; 
a  catechetical  dialogue  ;  prayer  against  blindness  and  hardness  of  heart  ; 
several  prayers  and  thanksgivings  from  Scripture,  and  the  Dirige, 
or  office  for  the  souls  of  the  dead,  with  a  preface  prefixed,  which 
inveighs  against  the  practice  of  misapplying  to  the  dead  passages 
used  by  the  living  to  excite  the  compassion  of  friends.  '  We 
have  rung  and  sung,  mumbled  and  murmured,  and  piteously 
pewled  in  a  certain  sort  of  Psalms,  which  make  no  more  for  the 
purpose  than  Te  Deum  or  Gloria  in  Excelcis.''  In  the  Dirige  there 
is  nothing  taken  out  of  Scripture  that  makes  any  more  mention 
of  the  souls  departed,  than  doth  the  tale  of  Robin  Hood.'''  Then 
follow  COMMENDATIONS,  &c.  In  somc  copies,  the  Collects,  Epistles 
and  Gospels  throughout  the  year,  are  added,  and,  in  others,  expo- 
sitions of  them.  But  in  the  smaller  volumes,  many  of  the  Arti- 
cles already  enumerated  are  omitted. 

2 


26  HISTORICAL   SKETCH    OF   THE    LITURGY. 

such  parts  of  the  Church  service  as  were  most  required, 
as  well  as  to  supply  them  with  the  creed,  the  Lord's 
prayer,  and  the  ten  commandments,  in  the  vulgar 
tongue.'"'  The  Litany,  varying  but  little,  in  other 
respects,  from  the  present  form,  contains  petitions  re- 
questing the  prayers  of  angels,  saints,  and  martrys,  as 
also  to  be  delivered  from  the  tyranny  of  the  Church  of 
Rome.     It  contains,  also,  prayers  for  the  dead. 

Besides  this  first  step  towards  the  reformation  of  the 
forms  of  public  worship,  there  were  several  formularies 
of  faith  put  forth  in  the  English  tongue  during  the 
same  reign.  A  very  general  notice  of  them  must 
suffice.  None  of  these  documents  are  of  any  authority 
at  the  present  day  ;  but  they  are  interesting  and  im- 
portant in  tracing  the  history  of  religious  opinion.  The 
first  document  was  "The  Articles  devised  by  the 
king's  highness'  majesty  to  stablish  Christian  quietness 
and  unity  among  us,  and  to  avoid  contentious  opposi- 
tions, which  Articles  be  also  approved  by  the  consent 
and  determination  of  the  whole  clergy  of  this  realm, 
Anno  Domini  L536."  The  second  formulary  of  faith 
was  "  The  godly  and  pious  institution  of  a  Christian 
man,  containing  an  exposition  of  the  Creed,  of  the 
seven  Sacraments,  of  the  Ten  Commandments,  of  the 
Lord's  Prayer,  together  with  Articles  upon  Justifica- 
tion and  Purgatory."  This  was  published  in  1537. 
The  third  was  a  republication  and  enlargement  of 
''The  pious  institution  of  a  Christian  man,"  and  was 
called,  "  The  necessary  Doctrine  and  Erudition  of  any 

"'Short's  History  of  the  Church  of  England,  pp.  278,  279. 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY.  27 

Christian  man."  An  examination  of  these  formularies 
of  faith  will  confirm  the  opinion  before  expressed,  that 
but  little  progress  towards  purity  of  doctrine  had  been 
made  during  this  reign. 

Nevertheless,  these  articles  and  formularies,  in  con- 
nection with  other  causes,  removed  many  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  reformation.  The  clamor,  excited  among 
the  papists  by  their  publication,  attests  their  influence 
as  preparatory  to  more  important  changes.  The  in- 
junctions set  forth  in  the  name  of  the  king  in  the  same 
year  with  the  articles  contributed  to  the  same  result. 
By  them  the  clergy  were  enjoined  to  explain  what  were 
articles  of  faith,  and  what  related  only  to  discipline  ; 
they  were  bidden  not  to  extol  images,  to  discourage 
pilgrimages,  to  instruct  children  in  the  principles  of 
religion  ;  they  were  enjoined  to  refrain  from  games, 
and  from  frequenting  public  houses,  and  to  devote 
themselves  to  the  study  of  the  sacred  Scriptures,  These 
were  the  dawnings  of  a  bright  day  for  the  English 
Church.  She  had  thrown  off  the  iniquitous  external 
bondage  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  During  the  reign 
of  Edward  VI,  she  cast  off  the  doctrinal  corruption  of 
that  Church  also,  and  came  forth  clad  in  the  shining 
livery  of  truth. 

In  1547,  a  most  important  step  was  taken  to  reform 
the  public  worship.  A  communion  service,  by  the 
direction  of  an  act  of  parliament,  was  composed,  which 
provided  that  the  Holy  Couununion  should  be  received 
by  the  laity  in  both  kinds,  and  excluded  the  superstition 
of  the  mass.  This  service  is  very  similar  to,  though 
shorter  than,  that  which  formed  part  of  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  published  the  following  year. 


OfS  HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY. 

But  it  was  in  the  following  year,  the  first  of  King 
Edward  VI,  that  the  whole  service  was  put  forth  in  the 
English  tongue,  and  all  the  worshippers  thus  enabled  to 
worship  with  "the  spirit,  and  with  the  understanding 
also."  Henry  VIII  died  in  1547.  Edward  VI,  a  pure 
and  Protestant  child,  succeeded  him.  The  injunctions 
issued  at  the  commencement  of  his  reign,  indicate  the 
clear  purpose  to  sweep  away  all  human  superstitions. 

"Item. — That  they,  the  present  above  rehearsed,  shall 
make,  or  cause  to  be  made,  in  their  churches,  and  every 
other  cure  they  have,  one  sermon  every  quarter  of  the 
year  at  the  least,  wherein  they  shall  purely  and  sin- 
cerely declare  the  word  of  God;  and  in  the  same  exhort 
their  hearers  to  the  works  of  faith,  mercy,  and  chanty 
specially  prescribed  and  commanded  in  Scripture;  and 
that  works,  denied  by  men's  phantgisies,  besides  Scrip- 
ture, as  wandering  to  pilgrimages,  offering  of  money, 
candles,  tapers,  or  relicks,  or  images,  or  kissing,  or 
licking  of  the  same;  praying  upon  beads,  or  such  like 
superstition,  have  not  only  no  promise  of  reward  in 
Scripture  for  doing  of  them;  but,  contrariwise,  great 
threats  and  maledictions  of  God,  for  that  they  be  things 
tending  to  idolatry  and  superstition,  which  of  all  other 
offenses  God  doth  most  detest  and  abhor,  for  that  the 
same  diminish  most  his  honor  and  glory. ^ 

The  advocates  for  reform,  Cranmer  and  Ridley,  then 
rose  into  ascendency.  Public  disputations  were  held  at 
Oxford,  and  at  Cambridge,  on  the  doctrine  of  Transub- 

■*  "Injunctions  given  by  the  most  excellent  Prince  Edward  VI, 
by  Grace  of  God,  King  of  England,  France  and  Ireland,  Defender 
of  the  Faith,"  &c. — Liturgical  Tracts,  M>.  1. 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY.  29 

stantiation.  At  Cambridge  the  theses  sumiped  up  by- 
Ridley  were  that  ''  Tran substantiation  cannot  be  proved 
from  the  direct  words  of  Scripture,  nor  be  necessarily 
collected  from  it;  nor  is  it  confirmed  from  the  early 
fathers;  that  in  the  Eucharist  no  other  sacrifice  is  made 
than  the  remembrance  of  Christ's  death  and  sufferings." 
Thus  was  the  way  fully  prepared  for  the  first  Liturgy, 
which  was  published  in  the  year  1549. 

This,  the  original  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  though 
in  its  general  appearance  like  that  at  present  in  use, 
differs  from  it  in  many  particulars,  some  of  which  are 
important.  It  contains  some  of  the  errors  of  the  Church 
of  Rome  which  were  afterwards  rejected.  It  has  been 
justly  said  to  form  a  connecting  link  between  the  Missal 
and  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.**  A  committee  of 
thirteen  bishops  and  divines,  with  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  at  their  head,  were  appointed  to  prepare 
this  service  of  the  Church."  "  In  order  to  this,"  says 
Burnet,  "  they  brought  together  all  the  offices  used  in 
England."'     "So  it  being  resolved,"  says  the  same 

5  Short. 

•^  Such  is  the  statement  of  Fuller.  Burnet  says.  "  Some  had  been , 
in  King  Henry's  time,  employed  in  the  same  business,  in  which 
they  had  made  a  good  progress,  and  were  now  to  be  brought  to  a 
full  perfection."  Burnet  names  twenty-four  on  the  commission. 
Shepherd  remarks,  that "  the  commission  is  not  probably  on  record, 
and  in  the  statute  the  archbishop  only  is  named.  The  other  com- 
missioners are  there  called  inof.t  learned  and  discreet  bishops  and 
divines.'"  The  same  author  remarks,  that  "  the  work  probably 
passed  only  through  the  hands  of  a  few." — Shepherd  on  Common 
Prayer,  p.  18. 

'Burnet,  vol.  ii,  p.  114. 


30  HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY. 

authority,  "  to  bring  in  the  whole  worship  of  God  under 
set  forms,  they  set  one  general  rule  to  themselves 
(which  they  afterwards  declared)  of  changing  nothing 
for  novelty's  sake,  or  merely  because  it  had  been  form- 
erly used."*  The  whole  of  the  service  was  in  the 
English  tongue.  In  the  Funeral  Service  there  were 
prayers  for  the  dead.  The  custom  of  anointing  with 
oil  is  retained  in  the  Office  for  Baptism,  and  in  the 
Visitation  of  the  Sick,  when  it  is  required.  In  the 
Office  of  Baptism  also,  there  is  a  form  of  exorcism  to 
expel  the  evil  spirit  from  the  child.  The  form  of  the 
cross  was  retained  in  consecrating  the  elements  in  the 
celebration  of  the  communion,  in  matrimony,  in  con- 
firmation, and  in  visiting  the  sick.  The  arrangement 
of  the  service  was  also,  in  several  particulars,  different 
from  that  of  the  present  service.  The  Morning  and 
Evening  Prayer  began  with  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  the 
prayers  for  the  king,  the  royal  family,  and  the  clergy, 
were  wanting  in  the  end  of  the  service.  A  prayer  for 
rain,  and  one  for  fair  weather,  were  placed  at  the  close 
of  the  Communion  Service. 

The  ancient  offices  of  the  Church  of  England  were 
not,  as  might  be  inferred  from  the  above  language  of 
Burnet,  the  only  souices  whence  our  Liturgy  was  de- 
rived. It  was  greatly  indebted  also  to  the  labors  of  the 
continental  reformers.  Says  Dr.  Cardweli,  a  learned 
ritualist  of  the  present  day,"  "  In  the  great  body  of  this 
work  indeed  they  derived  their  materials  from  the  early 

**  Burnet,  vol.  ii,  p.  116. 

^  The  Two  Liturgies  of  Edward  VI  compared,  p.  16. 


HISTORICAL   SKETCH    OF   THE    LITURGY.  31 

service  of  their  own  Church;  but  in  the  occasional  of- 
fices, it  is  clear,  that  they  were  indebted  to  the  labors 
of  Melancthon  and  Bucer,  and  through  them  to  the 
older  Liturgy  of  Nuremburg,  which  those  reformers 
were  instructed  to  follow."  "  It  is  a  strong  indication," 
he  adds,  **  of  the  prudence  and  discernment  of  the 
English  divines,  and  especially  of  the  primate  who  pre- 
sided over  them,  that  they  drew  up  so  temperate  a  form 
of  public  worship,  when  the  great  body  of  the  people, 
for  whom  it  was  designed,  were  totally  unfitted  for  any 
further  alteration.""' 


'"The  following  is  the  title  and  table  of  contents  of  the  first  book 
of  Edward  VI. 

"  The  Book  of  the  Common  Prayer  and  Administration  of  the 
Sacraments,  and  other  Rites  and  Ceremonies  of  the  Church  ;  after 
the  use  of  tlie  Church  of  England.  Londoni  in  officino  Edwardi 
Whitchurch.  Cum  privilegio  ad  imprimendum  solum  Anno  Do. 
1549.     Mense  maii. 

The  coi\tents  of  this  book. 

1.  A  Preface. 

2.  A  Table  and  Kalendar  for  Psalms  and  Lessons,  with  necessary 

Rules  pertaining  to  the  same. 

3.  The  order  for  Matins  and  Evensong  throughout  the  year. 

4.  The  Introits,  Collects,  Epistles  and  Gospels,  to  be  used  at  the 

celebration  of  the    Lord's   Supper   and    Holy   Communioau|tf 
througii  the  year,  with  proper  Psalms  and  Lessons  for  divers* 
Feasts  and  Days.  , 

5.  The  Supper  of  the  Lord  and   Holy  Communion,  commonly 

called  the  Mass. 

6.  The  Litany  and  Suffrages. 

7.  Of  Baptism,  both  public  and  private. 

8.  Of  Confirmation,  where  also  is  a  Catechism  for  children. 

9.  Of  Matrimony. 

10.  Of  Visitation  of  the  Sick,  and  Communion  of  the  same. 


32  HISTORICAL   SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY. 

Here,  then,  we  have  the  first  form  of  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  the  first  and  besi  gift  of  the  Reforma- 
tion to  the  Church.  Though  it  needed  alteration  in 
several  particulars,  it  was  yet,  under  the  circumstances, 
an  unspeakable  blessing  to  the  Church,  and  gave  birth 
to  a  spirit  which  demanded  and  effected  its  purification 
from  the  few  Romish  errors  which  yet  spotted  its  else 
perfect  purity. 

In  1552,  but  three  years  after  its  formation,  it  was 
revised.  Cranmer  and  other  divines,  probably  the  same 
as  originally  compiled  it,  subjected  it  to  a  full  review. 
"  While  this  was  in  progress,  two  learned  foreigners, 
who  were  then  in  England,  were  consulted  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  their  opinions  seem  to  have  coincided  with,  or 
to  have  influenced  the  decisions  of  the  English  bishops, 
for  most  of  the  points  objected  to  by  Bucer  were  subse- 
quently amended,  and  the  sentiments  of  Peter  Martyr 
appear  to  have  been  very  similar  to  those  of  Bucer." 
Says  Bishop  Jeremy  Taylor,  "  The  truth  is,  that  al- 
though they  framed  the  Liturgy  with  the  greatest  con- 
sideration that  could  be  by  all  the  united  wisdom  of 
church  and  slate,  yet,  as  if  prophetically  to  avoid  their 
being  charged,  by  after  ages,  with  a  crepescidum  of  re- 

11.  Of  Burial. 

12.  The  Purification  of  Women. 

13.  A  declaration  of  Scripture,  with  certain  Prayers  to  be  used  the 

first  day  of  Lent,  commonly  called  Ash-Wednesday. 

14.  Of  cereinonies  omitted  or  retained. 

15.  Certain  Notes  for  the  more  plain  explication  and  decent  minis- 

tration of  things  contained  in  this  book. 
"  Short's  History  of  the  Church  of  England,  p.  281. 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY.  33 

ligion — a  dark,  twilight,  imperfect  reformation — they 
joined  to  their  own  star  all  the  other  shining  tapers  of 
the  other  reformed  churches,  calling  for  the  advice  of 
the  most  ejnineiitly  learned  and  zealous  reformers  in 
other  kingdoms,  that  the  light  of  all  together  might  show 
them  a  clear  path  to  walk  in.  And  this  their  care  pro- 
duced some  chaniic;  for,  upon  consultation,  the  first 
iorin  of  King  Edward's  first  service  book  was  approved, 
with  the  exce])tion  of  a  very  few  clauses,  wliich  upon 
that  occasion  were  reviewed  and  expunged,  till  it  came 
to  the  second  form  and  modest  beauty  it  was  in  the 
edition  of  15.0'2,  and  which  Gilbertus,  a  German,  ap- 
proved as  a  tianscript  of  the  ancient  and  primitive 
forms.'"'  The  Prayer  Book,  thus  "reviewed  and  ex- 
punged," differs  very  little  from  the  one  now  in  use  in 
our  Church.  The  introductory  sentences,  the  exhorta- 
tion, the  confession,  and  the  absolution,  were  then  in- 
troduced, and  were  taken  in  great  part  from  a  Liturgy 
composed  by  Calvin."  The  Ten  Commandments  were 
then  also  introduced  into  the  Communion  Service,  pro- 
bably from  the  same  source.'*  A  very  important  addi- 
tion to  the  work  was  the  introduction  of  a  service  called 
"  The  form  and  manner  of  making  and  consecrating  of 
Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons."  The  introit,  a  psalm 
used  before  the  collect,  was  omitted,  together  with  the 
name  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  the 
consecration  of  the  elements,  and  the  invocation  of  the 
Word  and  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  them  which  accompa- 

'«  Bishop  Taylor's  Works,  vol.  vii,  288. 
"Lawrence,  Bampton  Lectures,  p.  207. 
"Short,  p.  281,  note. 

2* 


34  HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY. 

nied  it,  and  the  mixture  of  water  with  the  wine.  In 
baptism,  the  forms  of  exorcism,  of  anointing  with  oil, 
and  of  the  trine  immersion,  were  omitted.  The  sign  of 
the  cross,  and  the  giving  of  gold  and  silver  in  matri- 
mony were  omitted.  In  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick,  the 
anointing  and  the  directions  for  private  confession,  were 
omitted.  In  the  Burial  Service,  the  prayers  for  the 
dead,  and  the  Office  of  the  Eucharist  at  funerals,  were 
omitted.  Thus,  in  the  most  significant  manner,  were 
all  these  practices  condemned.  The  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  thus  came  forth  from  the  hands  of  the  Reformers 
the  most  perfect  formulary  of  worship  which  the  world 
ever  saw. 

When,  soon  after  the  accession  of  Queen  Elizabeth 
to  the  throne,  Protestanism  was  re-established  in  Eng- 
land, in  1560,  this  second  Liturgy  of  King  Edward  was 
adopted  with  few  and  unimportant  alterations.'' 

'*This  is  a  proper  place  to  specify,  once  for  all,  what  these 
changes  were.  They  are  thus  concisely  stated  by  Short :  "  The 
changes  specified  in  the  act  of  uniformity,  1st  Elizabethae,  are  with 
one  alteration  of  certain  Lessons  to  be  used  every  Sunday  in  the 
year,  and  the  form  of  the  Litany  altered  and  corrected,  and  two 
sentences  only  added  in  the  delivery  of  the  sacrament  to  the  com- 
municants, and  none  other  or  otherwise."  Of  these,  the  changes  in 
the  Lessons  are  not  considerable.  In  the  Litany  the  petition  to  be 
delivered  from  the  tyranny  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was  omitted, 
and  that  for  the  dueen  altered.  And  at  the  communion  both  the 
clauses  at  the  presentation  of  the  elements,  which  had  stood  in  the 
first  and  second  of  Edward,  were  put  together  forming  the  words 
now  used.  The  clause  in  the  act  of  uniformity,  1st  Elizabethae, 
about  dresses  is,  "  Such  ornaments  of  the  Church  and  of  the  min- 
isters thereof  shall  be  retained  and  be  used,  as  was  in  the  Church 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY.  35 

In  1604,  during  the  reign  of  James  I,  in  consequence 
of  a  conference  Avith  the  Pre^-byterian  divines,  held  at 
Hampton  Court,  a  few  changes  were  introduced  into 
the  Liturgy,  but  such  as  had  no  legal  authority,  be- 
cause only  sanctioned  by  royal  proclamation,  not  by 
the  authority  of  the  convocation  and  of  parliament. 

In  1661,  the  Common  Prayer  was  submitted  for  al- 
teration to  the  convocation  then  sitting.  After  the 
restoration  of  Charles  II,  there  had  been  a  fruitless 
conference  at  the  Savoy  between  the  Bishops  and  the 
Presbyterian  divines.  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
was  then  put  into  the  form  in  which  it  now  stands  in 
the  Church  of  England.  The  alterations  w^hich  were 
made  at  this  revision  were  many  of  them  changes 
in  the  arrangement  of  the  services.  The  new  version 
of  the  Bible  was  adopted,  except  in  the  Psalms,  the  Ten 
Commandments,  and  the  sentences  in  Communion 
Service.  The  prayer  for  parliament,  for  all  conditions 
of  men,  the  general  thanksgiving,  and  some  new  col- 
lects were  added.  The  service  for  the  baptism  of  those 
of  riper  years  was  introduced,  and  also  the  form  of 
prayer  to  be  used  at  sea.  Some  minor  changes  it  is 
not  regarded  as  important  that  we  should  notice. 


of  England  by  authority  of  psiiliament  in  the  second  year  of  the 
reign  of  Edward  VI,  until  order  shall  be  therein  taken  by  the 
authority  of  the  dueen's  majesty,"  by  the  advice  of  the  ecclesia.s- 
tica!  commission  or  of  the  metropolilan  of  this  reahii.  "  I  am  not 
aware  that  any  such  order  was  ever  taken  by  dueen  Elizabeth. 
And  by  the  act  of  uniformity,  Charles  II,  14th,  and  the  rubric,  this 
is  now  the  law  of  the  land."  (Short,  282.)  We  shall  have  occa- 
sion hereafter  to  refer  to  the  subject  of  habits. 


36  HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY. 

We  have  thus  rapidly  brought  down  the  history  of 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  until  its  completion  as  it  is 
now  in  use  in  the  Church  of  England.  It  remains  for 
us  to  narrate  the  circumstances  under  which  the  Litur- 
gy of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  this  country 
was  adopted. 

The  situation  of  the  members  of  the  Episcopal  Church 
in  this  country,  after  the  war  of  the  Revolution,  was 
pecuHar  and  unprecedented.  Before  that  period,  they 
had  been  a  branch  or  Diocese  of  the  Church  of  England, 
under  the  Episcopate  of  the  Bishop  of  London.  When 
this  country  became  independent  of  England,  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Episcopal  Church  became,  of  necessity, 
severed  from  all  connection  with  the  Church  of  England. 
What,  then,  was  their  condition  ?  The  union  with  the 
Church  of  England  was  dissolved  ;  but  their  unity  with 
her  was  maintained,  because  they  still  retained  the 
same  Creeds,  Liturgy,  and  Articles.  What  was  the 
position  of  the  several  Episcopal  congregations  to- 
wards each  other  ?  There  was  unity  among  them  all, 
— but  was  there  also  union  .'  Manifestly  not.  Each 
congregation  dropped  off  from  the  authority  which  as  a 
golden  thread  running  through  them  united  them,  and 
became  a  Church,  complete  and  independent,  at  unity 
with  all  other  Episcopal  congregations,  but  not  in  union. 
But  it  was  both  the  duty  and  interest  of  all  Episcopal 
congregations  in  the  country  to  be  not  only  in  unity  in 
the  faith,  but  united  also  in  ecclesiastical  government 
as  one  body.  Providentially  left  as  separate  Churches, 
in  unity  without  union,  it  was  their  duty,  on  Gospel 
principles    and    primitive    usage,   at   once    to  effect   a 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY.  37 

union  in  each  separate  State.  How  was  that  effected  ? 
First,  the  several  congregations  in  each  State  met  in 
convention  and  adopted  a  constitution  and  canons 
which  made  them  separate  and  independent  Dioceses 
in  each  State.  One  step  from  unity  to  union  here 
was  taken.  There  was  union  between  all  the  Churches 
in  each  State.  But  the  Church  thus  one  in  one  State, 
was  not  yet  in  union  with  the  Church  in  any  other  State. 
We  will  now  briefly  detail  the  steps  which  were  taken 
to  bring  about  that  union  of  all  the  Churches  under  one 
constitution,  by  means  of  which  they  became  the  one 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of 
America.  ^- 

The  first  step  towards  forming  a  collective  body  of 
the  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  was  taken 
at  a  meeting,  for  another  purpose,  of  a  few  clergymen 
of  New  York,  New  Jersey,  and  Pennsylvania,  at 
Brunswick,  New  Jersey,  on  the  13th  and  14th  of  May, 
1784.  These  clergymen  met  for  the  purpose  of  con- 
sulting upon  the  renewal  of  a  society  formerly  existing 
for  the  support  of  widows  and  children  of  deceased 
clergymen.  Here  a  meeting  was  appointed  to  be  held 
in  New  York,  in  October,  to  confer  on  some  general 
principles  of  union.  The  meeting  accordingly  was 
held.  The  general  principles  which  they  agreed  should 
be  the  basis  of  union  were,  the  continuance  of  the  three 
orders,  the  use  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and 
the  establishment  of  a  representative  body  of  the 
Church,  consisting  of  clergy  and  laity,  who  were  to 
vote  in   distinct   orders.     They    recommended    to  the 

'*  Hawk's  Constitution  and  Canons,  pp.  5-8. 


38  HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY. 

Church  to  send  clerical  and  lay  deputies  to  a  meeting 
to  be  held  in  Philadelphia,  on  the  27th  of  September,  of 
the  following  year. 

On  the  27th  of  September,  accordingly,  in  1785,  a 
convention  of  clerical  and  lay  deputies  from  seven  of 
the  thirteen  States  assembled  in  Philadelphia.  The 
States  represented  were  New  York,  New  Jersey,  Dela- 
ware, Maryland,  Pennsylvania,  Virginia,  and  South 
CaroUna.  They  made  such  changes  in  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer  as  were  necessary  to  accommodate  it  to 
the  changes  in  the  State.  A  general  ecclesiastical 
constitution  was  proposed  ;  measures  were  taken  to 
obtain  the  Episcopacy  ;  changes  in  the  Prayer-Book 
and  Articles  were  proposed  and  published  in  a  book, 
never  adopted  by  our  Church,  called  the  Proposed 
Book.  It  remained  to  be  seen  whether  the  Episcopate 
could  be  obtained,  and  whether  the  union  thus  pro- 
posed would  be  ratified  and  effected  in  a  subsequent 
General  Convention.  A  committee  was  appointed  with 
power  to  reassemble  them,  if  it  should  be  deemed 
necessary  or  expedient,  at  Philadelphia. 

Having  received  an  answer  from  the  English  Bishops 
to  their  appHcation  for  the  Episcopacy,  the  convention 
was  reassembled  in  Philadelphia,  June  20,  1786.  The 
Bishops  of  the  English  Church  expressed  a  wish  to 
comply  with  the  request,  but  delayed  to  take  measures 
for  that  purpose  until  they  saw  what  alterations  in  the 
form  of  faith  and  worship  were  to  be  adopted  in  con- 
vention. The  convention,  by  an  address,  acknowledged 
the  friendly  letter  of  the  Bishops,  and  declared  a  de- 
termination of  making  no  further  alteration  in  the  Arti- 
cles and  Liturgy  than  a  change  of  circumstances  made 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITDRGY.  39 

necessary,   or  than   was  conducive   to  a  union  of  the 
Churches  of  the  several  States, 

The  answer  to  this  address  was  soon  received,  in 
which  the  Bishops  enclosed  an  act  of  parliament, 
authorizing  them  to  consecrate  Bishops  for  America, 
and  in  which  they  also  expressed  a  desire  to  be  satis- 
fied with  regard  to  the  omission  of  the  article  in  the 
creed  which  expresses  a  belief  of  Christ's  descent  into 
hell.  They  were  also  dissatisfied  that  no  express  pro- 
vision was  made  for  the  presidency  of  Bishops  in 
conventions.  The  General  Convention  reassembled 
at  Wilmington,  Delaware,  removed  these  objections, 
and  signed  the  testimonials  for  the  consecration  of  the 
Rev.  Drs.  Provoost,  of  New  York,  White,  of  Penn- 
sylvania, and  Griffeth,  of  Virginia,  who  had  been  duly 
chosen  by  the  conventions  of  their  respective  Dioceses. 
On  the  '2Htb  of  July,  1789,  the  General  Convention 
having  again  assembled,  the  Episcopacy  of  Bishops 
White  and  Provoost — Dr.  Griffeth  not  having  been 
able  to  proceed  to  England  to  obtain  it — was  recog- 
nised, and  the  constitution  of  1786  remodeled  and 
amended.  Assembled  again  in  September,  1789,  the 
constitution  thus  remodeled  and  amended  v^'as,  with 
slight  alterations,  adopted ;  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  reviewed  and  slightly  altered,  and  thus  amend- 
ed, became  our  formulary  of  faith  and  worship.  Thus 
the  Episcopal  Churches  in  the  various  States  became 
the  one  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United 
States,  with  our  present  constitution  and  Liturgy.  " 

"  Bishop  White's  Memoirs  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church. 


40  HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF   THE    LITURGY. 

These  brief"  historical  details  have  been  given,  that  it 
may  be  seen  precisely  whence  and  how  we  received 
and  adopted  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  Having 
traced  it  as  a  whole,  in  its  external  history,  as  it  came 
forth  from  the  hands  of  the  Reformers,  and  as  it  passed 
down  through  the  successive  periods  of  English  and 
American  history,  till  we  see  it  as  it  now  hes  upon  the 
desks  of  our  churches,  we  shall,  on  subsequent  occa- 
sions, open  its  golden  pages,  and  read  its  sound  forms 
of  faith,  and  its  burning  words  of  prayer.  Here  we 
pause  to  make  a  few  concluding  inferences  and  remarks. 

1.  We  call  the  reader's  attention  to  the  fact,  that  the 
Church  of  these  United  States  is  perfectly  independent 
of  the  Church  of  England,  and  of  all  other  Churches. 
Even  when  we  speak  of  her  as  a  branch  of  the  one  holy 
catholic  Church,  nothing  more  can  be  meant  by  the 
expression  than  that  she  is  united  in  the  unity  of  the 
faith,  on  fundamental  articles,  with  the  true  Churches 
of  Christ  of  every  clime  and  of  every  age.  The  uniform 
language  of  each  of  the  Dioceses,  and  of  the  General 
Convention,  is  in  substance  that  which  was  uttered  by 
the  Diocese  of  Maryland:  "We  consider  it  the  un- 
doubted right  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  in 
common  with  the  other  Churches,  under  the  American 
Revolution,  to  complete  and  preserve  herself  as  an  entire 
Chuirh,  agreeably  to  her  ancient  usages  and  professions, 
and  to  have  a  full  enjoyment  and  free  exercise  of  those 
purely  spiritual  powers  which  are  essential  to  the  being 
of  every  congregation  of  the  faithful,  and  which,  being 
derived  from  Christ  and  his  Apostles,  are  to  be  main- 
tained independent  of  every  foreign  or  other  jurisdic- 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY.  41 

tion,  SO  far  as  may  be  consistent  with  the  civil  rights  of 
society.""* 

2.  If  this  Church  be  thus  entire  and  independent, 
then  her  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  her  Creeds;,  Articles, 
and  forms  of  worship,  constitute  the  law  for  the  faith 
and  practice  of  the  ministers  and  members  of  that 
Church.  Much  loose,  radical,  disorganizing  speech  on 
this  subject  has,  of  late  years,  been  heard  among  us.  It 
has  been  customary  for  some  to  speak  as  if  the  ministers 
of  this  church  have  a  far  wider  range  in  which  to  form 
their  opinions,  and  from  which  to  adopt  their  practices, 
than  our  own  Church  standards  specify.  They  have 
spoken  as  if  we  were  connected  with  the  Church  Cath- 
olic, not  by  the  unity  of  faith  in  fundamentals  only,  but 
in  such  binding  sort  as  to  be  under  obligation,  or  to  be 
at  liberty  to  adopt  tenets  or  rites  not  provided  for  or 
enjoined  by  our  own  Church  as  authorities.  But  what  is 
the  fact  of  the  case  ?  Our  Church  has  adopted  such  fun- 
damental articles  of  faith,  and  such  rites  and  services 
from  the  Church  Catholic,  as  she  judged  conducive  to 
the  promotion  of  godliness  of  heart  and  life;  and  these 
are  the  rules  and  limits  for  her  children.  For  indi- 
viduals, who  have  bound  themselves  to  her  standards, 
to  go  beyond  them  and  select  for  themselves  what  they 
may  choose  to  call  catholic  truths,  or  catholic  customs — 
what  is  it  but  a  most  arrogant  and  undutiful  exercise  of 
private  judgment  against  the  teachings  of  their  mother 
Church?  what  is  it  but  a  shameless  violation  of  holy 

'*  A  declaration  of  certain  fundamental  rights  and  liberties  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  Maryland. 

Smith's  Sermons,  vol.  ii. 


42  HISTORICAL   SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY. 

VOWS?  This  Church  knows  no  laws  as  authoritative  but 
her  constitution  and  her  canons;  no  formularies  of  faith 
as  hers  but  her  Creeds  and  Articles;  no  rites,  ceremo- 
nies, or  prayers,  as  by  her  to  be  practised  or  allowed, 
except  those  which  are  contained  in  her  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer.  He  who,  travelling  back  into  the  dark 
ages,  becomes  enamored  of  childish  mummeries  and  a 
corrupted  faith,  might  press  their  introduction  into  our 
Creeds  and  Articles,  if  they  'were  now  to  be  anew 
adopted,  with  whatever  of  eloquence  or  of  logic  he 
might  possess;  but  to  hold  them  and  continue  in  con- 
nection with  a  church  from  which  they  have  been  cast 
out,  is  to  be  recreant  to  principle  and  to  honor. 

3.  But  though  the  church  in  this  country  be  inde- 
pendent, in  fact  and  right,  of  the  Church  of  England, 
it  is  with  gratitude  that  we  acknowledge  her  to  be  in- 
debted,  under  God,  for  "  her  first  foundation  and  long 
continuance  of  nursing  care  and  protection,"  to  that 
venerable  mother.  It  is  with  pride  that  we  claim  a 
close  resemblance  in  forms  of  faith  and  worship,  though 
not  in  ecclesiastical  organization,  to  her  who  numbers 
among  her  sons  so  many  saints  and  martyrs.  Though 
the  Bishops  of  the  English  Church  hesitated  to  convey 
the  Episcopacy  to  this  Church,  from  fear  that  important 
deviations  from  the  faith  and  practice  of  the  English 
Church  would  be  introduced,  they  soon  found  their 
fears  to  be  groundless.  We  glory  and  we  joy  in  being 
thus,  in  unbroken  line,  connected  with  the  blessed 
martyrs  of  the  Reformation.  Let  who  will  glory  in  being' 
of  yesterday;  we  rejoice  that  the  fathers  of  the  English 
Church  are  our  fathers.     We  press  this  Liturgy  closer 


HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY.  43 

to  our  hearts,  that  in  it  they  being  dead  yet  speak.  Yes, 
we  can  read  its  form  of  .sound  words,  and  hold  com- 
munion with  the  cahn,  even-balanced,  judicious,  judi- 
cial mind  of  Cranmer.  We  can  lay  its  fervent  prayers 
upon  our  hearts,  and  feel  vibrating  from  them  still, 
through  their  every  fibre,  the  throbbings  of  the  pure, 
strong,  noble,  lion  heart  of  the  sainted  Ridley.  We  can 
mount  on  its  triumphant  anthems  as  on  eagles'  wings, 
and  find  ourselves  soaring  in  companionship  with  Lati- 
mer, and  Bradford,  and  Taylor,  and  Philpot,  and  Rogers, 
for  whose  high  hearts  they  furnished  rejoicing  death- 
hymns.  Nay,  we  rejoice  that  in  these  services  we  can 
be  united  in  spirit  with  whatever  of  pure  piety  lived 
and  glowed  in  the  hearts  of  God's  children  of  "  the  ages 
all  along;"  esteeming  the  grains  of  pure  gold  none  the 
less  that  they  have  been  washed  down  to  us  by  the 
stream  of  time,  overlaid  and  buried  in  the  detritus  of 
the  Middle  Ages.  And  if  any  oppose  to  us  the  argu- 
ment that  we  should  reject  it  because  it  hns  been  in  the 
Romish  Church,  we  meet  the  statement  with  the  only 
answer  which  such  argument  deserves — the  answer 
of  King  James  to  the  Presbyterian  divines  at  Hampton 
Conference — ''The  papists  wear  shoes  and  stockings, 
therefore  we  must  go  barefoot."  Because  this  book 
embodies  much  of  the  old  forms  which  were  heard  in 
the  Churches  of  the  East,  which  Paul  planted  and 
ApoUos  watered,  and  which  were  afterwards  transferred 
to  the  Churches  of  the  West,  we  cling  to  it  with  the 
deeper  love.  And  when  one  comes  to  us  with  the  hack- 
neyed words  of  accustomed  censure  upon  our  forms,  as 
inducing  coldness  of  spirit,  and  checking  the  free  out- 


44  HISTORICAL    SKETCH    OF    THE    LITURGY. 

flow  of  the  feelings,  we  answer,  with  the  memories  ot 
the  past  glowing  in  our  hearts,  that  the  expression 
which  conveys  the  thoughts  of  one  mind  and  the  feel- 
ings of  one  heart,  cannot  satisfy  him  who  has  been  filled 
with  the  expression  which  conveys  the  collective  mind 
of  centuries,  and  whose  heart  has  been  bound  up  by  our 
prayers  in  one  sweet  brotherhood  with  the  warm,  beat- 
ing hearts  of  holy  men  of  various  climes  and  of  every 
age.    Yes,  this  is  our  answer  to  such  ungrounded  cavil: 

"Mine  is  no  solitary  choice  ; 

See  here  the  seal  of  saints  impressed  ; 
The  prayer  of  millions  swells  my  voice, 

The  mind  of  ages  fills  my  breast !" 


III. 


Doctrinal  Sustcm  of  tl)c  Cl)xircl). 


Having  rapidly  traced,  in  our  last  chapter,  the  ex- 
ternal history  of  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  we  shall 
now  proceed  to  open  its  pages,  and  inquire  after  their 
meaning.  If  we  shall  be  able  to  fix  upon  a  right  method 
of  investigation,  and  to  ascertain  the  general  scope  or 
system  of  doctrine  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  that 
we  may  thereby  be  furnished  with  a  key  to  unlock  each 
passage  in  detail,  then  the  inquiry  may  be  profitably 
and  satisfactorily  conducted. 

I.  First,  let  the  object  which  we  have  in  view  stand 
out  distinctly  before  our  minds.  Here  is  our  formulary 
of  faith  and  worship.  We  desire  to  know  what  is  the 
meaning  of  its  Creeds,  Articles,  and  Prayers.  That  is 
the  object  of  our  investigation.  That  is  the  only  object. 
We  have  heard  that  there  is  a  diversity  of  opinion  as 
to  what  are  the  doctrines  of  this  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church  of  these  United  States,  and  we  are  desirous  of 
ascertaining  for  ourselves  what  they  are.  .They  are 
contained  in  this  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  Let  us  open 


46  DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

it  and  read.  But  different  individuals,  upon  opening  it, 
come  to  different  conclusions,  as  to  what  its  real  mean- 
ing is.  Some  say  it  embodies  the  doctrinal  system  of 
Calvin.  Others  say,  "  Nay,  but  it  favors  the  Arminian 
scheme."  Some  contend  that  it  embodies  semi-popish 
views  of  the  word,  the  ministry  and  the  sacraments. 
Others  say,  "  Oh,  no,  it  is  purely  and  wholly  Protestant 
in  its  character."  This  is  precisely  what  different 
parties  say  of  the  Bible,  and  furnishes  presumptive 
evidence  at  least,  that  the  Prayer  Book  is  like,  and 
embodies  the  doctrines  of,  the  Bible.  Now,  it  is  mani- 
fest, in  this  diversity  of  opinion,  that  it  will  not  avail 
us  to  ascertain  what  different  men  say  is  the  meaning 
of  this  book.  We  must  ourselves  endeavor  to  get  at  its 
meaning.  Our  object,  then,  is  not  to  ascertain  what 
any  man,  or  set  of  men,  in  the  Church,  or  out  of  it, 
think  to  be  the  doctrines  of  this  book.  Our  object  is 
not  even  to  learn  what  a  majority  of  the  members  of 
this  Church  suppose  or  have  supposed  to  be  its  doctrine 
— for  majorities  are  not  infallible.  Our  one  object  is, 
with  a  teachable  and  hone.st  mind,  to  solve  this  inquiry, 
"What  mean  the  words  of  this  book?" 

II.  This  being  our  object,  what  method  of  investiga- 
tion shall  we  pursue?  I  think  we  shall  be  able  to  fix 
upon  some  principles,  sanctioned  by  reason  and  common 
sense,  which  will  guide  us  to  a  right  method. 

Here,  let  it  be  remembered,  that  our  object  is  to 
ascertain  the  meaning  of  this  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States. 
In  some  respects  it  differs  from  that  of  the  Church  of 
England. 


DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF   THE    CHURCH.  47 

The  historical  sketch  which  was  given  in  our  last 
chapter  may  guide  us  to  a  right  method  of  investiga- 
tion.    We  may  first  take  the  formularies  of  faith  pub- 
lished  in   the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.     If  there  be  any 
ambiguity  in  their  language,  we  can  turn  to  the  known 
and  recorded  opinions  of  those  who  framed  these  docu- 
ments.  We  shall  be  fully  persuaded,  by  such  a  method, 
of  their  prevailing  character.   In  the  same  w^ay  we  may 
take  the  first  Liturgy  of  Edward  VI.     If  there  be  any 
doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  any  part  uf  this  book,  great 
light  may  be  thrown  upon  it  by  a  knowledge  of  the 
opinions,  on  the  point  in  question,  of  those  by  whom 
the  Liturgy  was  framed.*  And  here  great  care  should 
be  taken  that  the  opinions  of  its  framers,  at  the  time  of 
its  formation^  should  be  ascertained.    As  the  Reformers 
came  very  gradually  to  the  adoption  of  those  views  in 
which  they  ultimately  rested,  it  would  manifestly  throw 
no  light  on  the  formularies  which  they  composed  at  one 
period,  to  ascertain  their  different  sentiments  at  a  pre- 
vious period.  For  instance,  it  is  well  known  that  Cran- 
mer  did  not  renounce  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation 
until  the  year  154.5,  when  he  was  convinced  of  its  falsity 
by  Ridley.  Now,  it  would  manifestly  give  an  erroneous 
view  of  the  Communion  Service  framed  under  the  direc- 
tion of  Cranmer,  in  1548,  to  refer  to  his  writings  pre- 
vious to   1545.     By  this  method  we  shall  be   Tble  to 
determine  the  doctrines  of  the  first  book  of  Edward  VI. 
Again:  when  we  find  the  book  revised  and  republished 
in  1552,  we  may  be  able  in  the  same  way  to  ascertain 
its  meaning.     We  turn  to  the  history  of  the  change. 
We  learn  with  what  view  certain  portions  of  the  servke 


48  DOCTRINAL   SYSTEM   OF    THE    CHURCH. 

were  introduced  and  others  omitted.  We  find  certain 
other  authentic  and  authoritative  documents  issued  at 
the  same  period  and  by  the  same  authority.  We  resort 
to  them  for  Hght.  Now,  as  our  single  inquiry  is,  "What 
is  the  meaning  of  that  book?"  which  is  a  different  in- 
quiry from  this,  "Did  the  great  mass  of  the  clergy  and 
people  of  England  at  that  time  believe  the  doctrines  of 
that  book?"  we  are  not  concerned  to  know  the  private 
opinions  of  men  who  had  no  paYt  in  framing  the  service, 
but  only  the  meaning  and  intent  of  those  by  whom  it 
was  framed  and  authorized.  In  this  way  we  ascertain 
the  doctrines  of  the  second  Liturgy  of  Edward  VI, 
which  remain  fixed  as  thus  aacertained,  whatever  may 
be  the  private  views  of  any  officers  and  ministers  of  the 
Church  until  again  changed.  If  any  changes  are  au- 
thoritatively introduced,  we  adopt  the  same  method  as 
before.  In  like  manner,  after  we  have  thus  traced  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer  to  its  present  form  in  the 
English  Church,  we  ascertain  what  changes  from  that 
form  have  been  made  in  the  American  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  with  what  view  those  changes  have  been 
introduced. 

Now,  if  these  plain  principles  be  correct,  we  shall  be 
able,  from  the  vast  mass  of  books  which  surround  the 
Liturgy  and  claim  to  illustrate  its  meaning,  to  select 
such  as  have  a  i-ight  to  be  heard  upon  this  subject. 
Doubtful  or  ambiguous  passages  in  the  Pi'ayer-Book  of 
Edward  VI,  can  best  be  illustrated  by  resorting  to  the 
writings  of  those  who  framed  it,  and  to  the  other  au- 
thoritative documents  of  the  Church  during  the  same 
period.     When,  subsequently,  changes  are  introduced, 


DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF   THE    CHURCH.  49 

we  may  ascertain  by  the  history  of  those  changes, 
how  far  the  doctrine  of  that  formulary  of  faith  has 
been  modified  by  them.  When,  having  crossed  the 
Atlantic,  and  become  the  standard  of  the  faith  and 
worship  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  the 
United  States,  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is  subject- 
ed to  other  changes,  we  may,  by  the  same  method, 
learn  what,  if  any,  modifications  of  faith  or  practice 
are  thereby  introduced,  A  course  of  thorough  investi- 
gation, therefore,  would  be  to  reject  all  merely  private 
and  individual  interpretation  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  confine  ourselves  to  the  works  of  those 
who  framed  it,  and  to  other  authorized  documents  put 
forth  at  the  time  of  its  formation.  Pursuing  this  course, 
we  should  resort  to  the  writings  of  Cranmer  and  Rid- 
ley, and  other  Reformers,  by  whom,  or  under  whose 
oversight,  the  Liturgy  was  framed.  Then  we  should 
examine  the  Catechism  and  the  Homilies  put  forth  at 
the  same  time,  and  by  the  same  authority.  Here  we 
should  have  the  great  body  of  doctrine  as  established 
in  the  Church  of  England.  Our  task,  then,  would  be 
substantially  completed  ;  for  it  is  confessed  that  the 
great  body  of  doctrine  remains  unaltered  as  it  was 
established  by  the  second  Liturgy  of  Edward  VL 

When  the  Liturgy  was  re-established  under  Queen 
Elizabeth,  it  was  with  so  few  changes  as  to  leave  it 
substantially  the  same.  Here,  however,  we  find  a  most 
important  and  authorized  work  put  forth  expressly  to 
explain  it — Jewel's  Apology  of  the  Church  of  England. 
It  was  approved  by  all  the  Bishops  as  a  true  explana- 
tion of  its  doctrines.  1  know  no  work  to  which  we 
3 


50  DOCTRINAL   SYSTEM   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

can  resort,  which  may  be  regarded  as  so  authoritative 
in  fixing  the  doctrines  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 
Says  Bishop  Short,  "  It  may  be  deemed  a  book  author- 
ized by  the  Church  of  England."  It  was  published  at 
the  command  of  the  queen,  and  ordered  to  be  set  up  in 
churches. '  It  is  quoted  in  the  Canons  of  the  Church 
of  England.  ^  Says  Bishop  Whittingham,  of  Mary- 
land, "  The  Apology  of  the  Church  of  England  bears 
nearly  the  same  relation  to  that  Church  that  is  pos- 
sessed, with  regard  to  the  Lutheran  Church  of  Ger- 
many, by  the  symbolical  books.  Like  the  latter,  the 
Apology  is  a  statement  of  doctrine  and  disciphne  put 
forth  for  the  purpose  of  refuting  the  calumnious  mis- 
representations of  the  Romish  Church.  Like  them,  it 
is  an  explanation  and  defence  of  the  avowed  principles 
of  the  communion  of  which  it  bears  the  name.  Like 
them,  it  was  formerly  acknowledged  as  such  by  ike  whole 
body  of  the  communion.'''''^  And  again  :  "In  another 
paper  relative  to  the  same  Convocation  [he  is  speaking 
of  a  Convocation  held  soon  after  the  publication  of  the 
work]  supposed  by  Strype  to  be  the  production  of 
Archbishop  Parker's  secretary,  it  was  proposed  to 
extract  from  the  Apology  articles  for  general  assent. 
When  it  is  remembered  that  these  propositions  were 
brought  before  the  Convocation  in  which  the  Cate- 
chism and  Articles,  as  they  now  stand,  were  discussed 
and  adopted,  the  high  ground  occupied  b}'^  the  Apology 
as  a  standard  of  the  Church  comes  clearly  into  view."^ 


'  Short,  124,  note  7.  "^  Canons  of  the  Church,  p.  228. 

'Standard  Works,  vol.  iii,  p.  vi.  ^ Id.,  p.  ix. 


DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF    THE    CHURCH.  51 

With  these  sources  of  information  before  us,  and  with 
a  careful  eye  on  the  few  subsequent  changes  in  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  it  would  seem  to  be  a  task 
not  impossible  of  accomplishment,  to  ascertain  accu- 
rately its  doctrines. 

Obviously  just  as  these  principles  are,  it  is  curious  to 
observe  how  summarily  they  are  disposed  of  by  certain 
writers  who  are  determined  to  find  in  a  latent,  if  not  in  a 
developed  state,  all  the  private  and  individual  notions 
which  they  baptize  with  the  name  Catholic.  "  They 
ought  to  be  there,  and  therefore  they  are  !"  is  the  argu- 
ment. Keble, ''"  in  his  Introduction  to  Hooker,  ex- 
pressly admits  that  his  (Keble's)  views  of  Episcopacy 
do  not  appeal-  in  the  writings  of  the  Reformers,  by 
whom  the  Liturgy  was  framed,  nor  in  the  writings  of 
those  who  immediately  succeeded  them.  What  then  .' 
Shall  we  infer  that  they  did  not  hold  them  ?  O,  no  ! 
says  Mr.  Keble,  they  held  them  ;  but  they  did  not 
avow  them  because  of  their  relation  to  the  foreign  Pro- 
testants ;  because  they  wanted  the  full  evidence  of 
antiquity,  and  because  of  the  influence  of  the  court. 
Can  any  man  believe  a  thing  so  absurd  ?  Here  are 
doctrines  which,  by  their  very  nature,  are  regarded  by 
those  who  hold  them  as  fundamental;  as  holding  the  front 
rank  in  importance;  as  those  upon  which  rest  right  views 
of  the  method  of  salvation;  nay,  as  those  on  which  sal- 
vation itself  is,  ordinarily,  dependent.  And  yet  men 
who  went  to  the  stake  for  principles  which  they  regarded 
as  fundamental,  did  not  hint  these  necessary  truths,  when 

*  Keble's  Hooker,  Introduction,  pp.  xxxi-vi. 


52  DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

they  professed  to  be  proclaiming  and  recording  for  future 
times  their  whole  system  of  religious  truth-  And 
this  course  they  pursued  from  the  most  unworthy  and 
cowardly  motives.  And  the  proof  of  this  strange  state 
of  mind, — where  is  it  ?  It  is  not  found  in  any  private 
records  or  letters  by  which  the  true  mind  of  those  most 
reserved  Reformers  can  be  ascertained  ;  but  it  is  rea- 
soned forth  in  syllogisms  whose  conclusions  would 
not  follow  even  if  their  premises  were  granted.  //  is 
obvious,  says  Mr.  Keble,  that,  in  these  doctrines,  the 
true  strength  of  their  cause  was  found  ;  they  must  have 
occurred  to  them,  because  they  were  the  received  doc- 
trine of  the  Church  down  to  their  time  ;  therefore  they 
must  have  held  these  doctrines  ;  therefore,  having 
withheld  the  expression  of  them,  it  must  have  been  on 
account  of  these  reasons  which  have  been  specified, 
because  no  better  reasons  can  be  found.  This  is  the 
argument.  It  is  obvious  to  Mr.  Keble ;  but  we  may  be 
sure  that  had  it  been  obvious  to  Ridley  and  Cranmer, 
we  should  find  them  proclaiming  their  convictions. 
They  must  have  occurred  to  them — and  so  did  the 
doctrine  of  Transubstantiation — but  the  Reformers  were 
very  far  from  adopting  every  doctrine  that  occurred  to 
them.  The  truth  is,  that  the  system  of  doctrine  held 
by  the  Reformers  and  embodied  in  our  formularies,  is, 
by  many,  not  regarded  as  sacredly  binding  on  the  con- 
science. What  ought  to  have  been  there  ;  what  has 
^  subsequently  been  developed  and  held  by  individuals 
or  by  schools,  are  the  doctrines  of  many  who  subscribe 
to  the  unchanged  standards  of  the  Church,  with  the 
conscious  or  unconscious  proviso  in  their  minds  that 


DOCTRINAL   SYSTEM   OF   THE    CHURCH.  53 

they  are  to  be  understood,  not  as  they  were  when  first 
established,  but  as  developed,  though  without  being 
authorized,  by  wiser  men  of  later  times.  If  this 
method  of  ascertaining  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  be 
sound,  the  search  is  manifestly  hopeless. 

All  doctrines  and  systems  may  be  found  in  our  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  in  germ  if  not  in  flower,  by  the 
decision,  on  the  part  of  individuals,  that  certain  grounds 
were  obviously  the  true  and  strong  ones  for  the  Re- 
formers to  assume,  and  thence  arguing,  that  they  must 
have  reservedly  held,  and  disguisedly  expressed  them, 
in  words  which,  to  the  casual  observer,  seem  to  convey 
other  meanings.  There  are  some  sign-boards  so  inge- 
niously constructed,  that  from  a  certain  point,  as  we 
stand  before  them,  they  convey  one  announcement,  and 
as  we  move  away  from  them  and  look  back,  they  are 
found  to  convey  another.  Some  such  device  must  have 
been  adopted  by  the  Reformers  of  the  Church.  As  we 
stand  before,  and  fix  a  direct  gaze  upon  the  fair  and 
strong  structure  which  they  have  erected,  the  word 
Protestant,  in  bold,  bright  characters  meets  the  eye; 
but,  as  we  move  away  from  it  and  turn  a  backward 
glance,  the  word  Catholic  is  found  to  have  usurped  its 
place  ;  and  if  we  move  far  enough  —  it  is  said  by  some 
—  we  will  find,  in  red  and  glaring  characters,  the  word 
Roman.  ® 

•'That  we  have  correctly  represented  Mr.  Keble's  views  is  evi- 
dent from  the  following  passage.  Here,  however,  instead  of  a 
development  of  views  previously,  though  latently  existing,  we  find 
it  distinctly  intimated  that  the  views  advocated  by  the  new  class  of 
vrritera,  wero  such  as  they  had  not  previously  held,  such  as  they 


54  DOCTRINAL   SYSTEM   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

If  we  bear  in  mind  the  principles  which  we  have 
here  unfolded,  we  may  hope  to  be  preserved  from  ma- 
terial error. 

III.  Having  stated  the  precise  object  M^hich  we  have 
in  view,  and  having  indicated  the  method  by  which  that 
object  may  be  accomplished,  it  will  greatly  aid  us  in 
unfolding  the  meaning  of  particular  passages,  if  we  can, 
at  this  stage  of  our  inquiry,  ascertain  the  general  scope 
or  system  of  doctrine  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

In  the  Church  of  England  there  have  been,  at  vari- 
ous times,  those  who  embraced  the  doctrinal  system  of 
Calvin,  and  who  have  contended  that  they  did  so  in 
consistency  with  the  Articles  of  the  Church.  Does  our 
Book  of  Common  Prayer  set  forth  the  system  of  doc- 
trine called  Calvinism  ? 

That  it  does  not  set  forth  or  involve  that  system,  we 

acquired  by  unlearning  opinions  heretofore  entertained.  On  eitiier 
hypothesis — though  both,  manifestly,  cannot  be  true — the  same 
fact  is  acknowledged,  namely,  that  the  views  of  Episcopacy  for 
which  Mr.  Keble  contends,  do  not  appear  in  the  writings  of  the 
Reformers. 

"  It  were  easy  to  multiply  quotations  ;  but  enough  has  been  ad- 
vanced to  justify  the  assertion,  that,  while  Hooker  was  engaged  in 
this  great  work,  a  new  school  of  writers  on  Church  subjects  had 
begun  to  show  itself  in  England ;  men  who  had  been  gradually  un- 
learning, some  of  those  opinions  which  intimacy  with  foreign  Pro- 
testants had  tended  to  foster,  and  had  adopted  a  tone  and  way  of 
thinking  more  like  that  of  the  early  Church." 

Keble's  Hooker,  p.  xxxv. 

The  writers  of  Mr.  Keble's  school  have,  of  late,  adopted  gener- 
ally the  latter  explanation.  They  have  overcome  all  reluctance  to 
accuse  the  Reformers  of  incompetency  and  radicahsm. 


DOCTRINAL   SYSTEM   OF   THE    CHURCH.  55 

think  can  be  very  briefly  and  clearly  proved.  The 
system  is  too  well  known  to  make  it  necessary  that  I 
should  here  describe  it. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  we  may  remark,  that  the  offices 
of  our  Church  were  not  drawn  from,  nor  materially 
influenced  by,  nor  completely  reformed  upon  the  model 
of  the  Calvinistic,  but  rather  upon  that  of  the  Lutheran 
Church.  The  only  trace  of  the  Calvinistic  formularies 
to  be  found  in  our  Liturgy  is  the  introduction  of  the 
Sentences,  Exhortation  and  Confession,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  our  service,  from  the  translation  of  a  form  pre- 
pared by  Calvin  for  the  Church  of  Strasburgh.  This  is 
not  a  servile  copy,  but  the  adoption  of  a  general  plan, 
with  several  variations.  They,  however,  involve  no 
peculiar  views  of  doctrine.  It  is  evident  to  one  familiar 
with  the  history  of  the  time,  that  Lutheranism  was  the 
system  which  had  most  influence  over  the  minds  of  the 
framers  of  the  Liturgy.  The  fact  that  Peter  Martyr 
and  Martin  Bucer  were  consulted  in  the  revision  of  the 
Liturgy,  in  1552,  has  been  adduced  as  evidence  of  the 
necessary  Calvinism  of  the  Church  standards.  But 
Bucer  was  a  Zwinglian, — not  a  Calvinist.  Martyr  was 
indeed  a  Calvinist ;  but  it  is  remarkable  that  none  of 
his  suggested  amendments  of  the  Liturgy  referred  to 
the  points  involved  in  Calvinism.  Indeed,  it  was  not 
until  after  his  return  to  the  continent,  during  Mary's 
reign,  that  Calvinism  in  its  fullness  as  a  system  was 
maintained. '  Cranmer,  it  is  well  known,  was,  at  the 
time  of  the  formation  of  the  Liturgy,  a  Lutheran  in  all 

'  Lawrence,  Bampton  Lectures. 


56  DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

points  but  that  of  Consubstantiation.  "  To  ascertain 
his  peculiar  sentiments,"  says  Dr.  Lawrence,  "  is  to  as- 
certain those  of  the  Reformation  ;  for  under  his  direc- 
tion, and  by  his  individual  aid,  were  prepared  the 
offices  of  our  Church  and  the  articles  of  her  Creed."* 
So  extensive  was  his  correspondence  with  the  German 
divines  upon  the  single  subject  of  a  General  Council, 
that  he  employed  an  agent,  whose  sole  business  it  was, 
under  his  direction,  to  conduct  that  correspondence. 
He  translated  a  Lutheran  Catechism,  in  1547,  two 
years  before  the  Liturgy  appeared.  He  was  in  constant 
correspondence  with  the  celebrated  Melancthon.  The 
divinity  chair  of  Cambridge  was  kept  open  for  Me- 
lancthon during  all  the  period  that  the  Articles  were 
in  preparation.  It  is  well  known  that  Melancthon,  with 
whom  Cranmer  had  such  cordial  sympathy,  had,  with 
the  assent  of  Luther,  expunged  from  the  Augsburgh 
Confession  the  article  which  asserted  an  unconditional 
election  and  reprobation.  The  Articles  of  the  Church, 
which  Cranmer  confessed  to  his  persecutors  to  have 
been  his  composition,  are  found,  upon  comparison,  to 
be  strikingly  similar  to  the  Confession  of  Wirtembergh, 
published  the  same  year  in  which  our  Articles  were 
completely  arranged  by  Cranmer.  The  resemblance 
does  not  consist  in  the  occasional  use  of  a  phrase,  similar 
or  the  same,  but,  in  many  cases,  entire  extracts  were 
made  without  the  slightest  omission  or  variation.  It  is 
clear,  therefore,  that  our  Liturgy  is  not  drawn  from 
Calvinistic  creeds,  and  was  not  modified  by  the  preva- 

^  Bampton  Lectures,  p.  18. 


DOCTRINAL   SYSTEM   OF   THE    CHURCH.  57 

lence  of  Calvinistic  views  on  the  part  of  those  who 
framed  it.  In  addition  to  these  conclusive  reasonings, 
it  may  be  remarked,  that  Calvin  himself  was  very  far 
from  being  satisfied  with  our  Liturgy  and  Articles,  as  he 
certainly  would  have  been,  had  they  contained  his  sys- 
tem. Writing  to  Cranmer,  he  said,  "  I  hear  such  a 
heap  of  papal  corruptions  has  been  spared,  as  must 
nearly  overwhelm  the  pure  and  genuine  worship  of 
God."  Of  the  second  Liturgy,  he  wrote  to  the  Eng- 
lish residents  at  Frankfort,  that  it  contained  many  fool- 
eries which  might  for  the  present  be  endured."^ 

But  though  our  Articles  of  faith  were  not  derived 
from  Calvin,  it  may  be  asked.  Has  not  our  Church,  in 
the  exercise  of  her  independent  judgment,  adopted  the 
same  system  ?  It  can,  we  think,  be  clearly  proved  by 
the  admission  and  conduct  of  Calvinists  in  the  Church, 
that  she  has  not. 

During  the  reign  of  Mary,  many  of  the  Reformers 
resided  on  the  continent,  and  there  a  number  imbibed 
the  views  of  Calvin.  After  the  return  of  those  exiles, 
upon  the  restoration  of  Elizabeth,  these  views  acquired 
great  prevalence  among  the  divines  of  the  English 
Church.  Yet,  be  it  observed,  the  standards  of  the 
Church  remained  unchanged.  The  Calvinists  have 
shown  that  they  are  not  completely  satisfied  that  our 
standards  exhibit  their  system,  by  repeated  attempts  to 
make  them  more  explicit.  In  159.5,  the  two  divinity 
professors  at  Cambridge  having  differed  on  this  subject, 

'  The  facts  in  the  above  paragraph  will  be  found  in  Strype's  Me- 
morials, and  in  Lawrence,  Bampton  Lectures. 

3* 


58  DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF    THE    CHURCH. 

the  matter  was  discussed  in  the  Archbishop's  palace, 
and  the  Lambeth  Articles,  as  they  have  since  been 
called,  agreed  upon.  These  contained  the  full  system 
of  Calvin .  They  were  not,  however,  drawn  up  by  any 
authority,  and  are  in  no  sense  part  of  the  Creed  of  the 
Church  of  England.  This  is  manifest  from  the  fruitless 
efforts  of  the  Calvinists  to  procure  the  insertion  of  the 
Lambeth  Articles  among  the  Established  Articles  of  the 
Church.  The  effort  was  made  at  the  Hampton  Court 
Conference.  The  proposal  was  there  made  b}'  Doctor 
Reynolds,  that  those  Articles  be  added  to  those  already 
adopted,  and  that  the  others  be  altered  in  various  par- 
ticulars to  agree  with  them.  Having  failed,  under 
James,  to  correct  what  they  called  the  "errors  and  im- 
perfections of  the  Church,  as  well  in  matter  of  doctrine 
as  discipline,"  they  commenced,  in  the  reign  of  Charles 
I,  by  the  authority  of  parliament,  a  reformation  of  our 
Articles.  This  they  did,  says  Neal,  the  historian  of  the 
Puritans,  that  they  might  "render  their  sense  more  ex- 
press and  determinate  in  favor  of  Calvinism."  They 
proceeded  as  far  as  the  fifteenth  Article,  modifying 
them  all  to  suit  the  Calvinistic  system,  and  there  aban- 
doned the  work,  either  because  they  found  the  Articles 
incorrigibly  opposed  to  them,  or  because  they  discerned 
the  prospect  of  being  able  soon  to  form  a  new  creed 
completely  conformable  to  their  views.  These  facts 
show  conclusively,  the  Calvinists  themselves  being 
judges,  that  their  views  were  not  necessarily  contained 
in  our  standards.  That  we  have  an  Article  on  Predes- 
tination no  more  proves  that  we  hold  the  Calvinistic 
view  of  Predestination,  than  the  fact  that  we  have  Arti- 


DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF    THE    CHURCH.  59 

cles  on  the  Sacraments  proves  that  we  hold  the  Romish 
views  of  the  Sacraments.  Belief  in  a  doctrine  of  Pre- 
destination— held  in  some  sense  by  every  Church — is 
surely  to  be  distinguished  from  belief  in  the  doctrine  as 
held  by  Calvin.  The  testimony  of  history  is  clear  that 
our  Liturgy  does  not  set  foith,  and  is  not  constructed 
upon,  the  system  of  Calvin. 

2.  Is  the  system  of  doctrine  called  Arminianism  that 
of  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer?  If  it  be,  it  cannot  be 
because  it  was  adopted  from  Arminius  or  his  successors, 
because  th^ir  system  had  not  been  proclaimed  when  our 
Liturgy  appeared.  But  does  it  embody  that  system  of 
doctrine?  Certain  it  is  that  during  the  primacy  of  Laud, 
Mhat  was  called  Arminianism  was  as  prevalent  among 
the  divines  of  the  English  Church,  as 'Calvinism  had 
been  in  the  later  years  of  Queen  Elizabeth.  But  still 
the  Church  standards  on  these  points  remained  un- 
changed. Much  that  was  then  called  Arminianism,  it 
is  believed,  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  system  of  its 
founder  and  of  its  continental  disciples.  Indeed,  it 
would  be  difficult  to , systematize  the  low^  and  unscrip- 
tural  views  at  that  time  going  under  the  name  of  Ar- 
minianisni.  It  was  a  party  name  to  designate  those 
wlio  agreed  with  Laud.  Perhaps  the  answer  of  Bishop 
Morley  to  the  country  gentleman  who  asked  him  what 
the  Aj-minians  held,  is  as  good  a  one  as  could  be  given: 
"They  hold,"  says  he,  "the  best  bishopricks  and  dean- 
eries in  England.''''  Arminius,  a  disciple  of  Calvin, 
began  to  differ  from  his  master  in   1591,  on  the  subject 

'"  Short,  History  of  English  Church. 


60  DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF   THE    CHURCH. 

of  Election.  The  chief  difference  between  his  system 
and  that  of  Calvin,  is  that  he  regarded  Election  as  con- 
ditional on  the  foreseen  repentance  and  faith  and  perse- 
verance of  the  elect;  whereas  Calvin  regarded  Election 
and  Reprobation  as  unconditional.  Our  Church  has  not 
defined  the  ground  of  Predestination  to  be  the  foreseen 
faith  of  the  elect,  but  has  designated  the  predestinated 
as  those  whom  "he  hath  chosen  in  Christ  out  of  man- 
kind." Our  Liturgy,  therefore,  does  not  set  forth 
Arminianism. 

3.  Does  our  Liturgy  set  forth  Lutheranism?  We 
have  already  shown  how  much  it  is  indebted  to  the 
Lutheran  Church,  and  how  much  resemblance  there  is 
between  its  doctrinal  system  and  that  of  the  Wirtem- 
bergh  Confession.  But  inasmuch  as  it  rejects  Consub- 
stantiation,  and  retains  the  three  orders  of  the  ministry, 
it  cannot  be  said  to  set  forth  the  Lutheran  system. 

4.  In  the  last  place,  is  the  general  system  set  forth 
in  our  Creeds  and  Articles,  that  of  Semi-Popery,  or  as 
it  was  termed  by  Bishop  Griswold,  Low  Popery?  There 
have  been  those  in  the  Church,  at  various  periods,  who 
have  held  a  system  which  is  thus  appropriately  termed. 
They  could  not  be  said  to  be  papists,  because  they  re- 
jected the  supremacy  of  the  Pope  and  the  doctrine  of 
Transubstantiation.  Or  if,  in  some  cases,  they  have  not 
rejected  the  latter  doctrine,  they  have  declined  to  ex- 
plain it  and  avow  it  with  the  same  particularity  and 
fullness  as  the  papists.  Still,  although  rejecting  these 
doctrines,  they  have  contended  for  the  real  presence  of 
Christ's  body  and  blood  in  the  elements,  and  have  re- 
garded the  Lord's  Supper  as  a  sacrifice,  propitiatory  for 


DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF    THE    CHURCH.  61 

sin,  the  presbyter  a  priest,  and  the  table  of  the  Lord  an 
altar.  They  have  described  Baptism  as  the  source  and 
cause  of  the  inner  spiritual  regeneration.  They  have 
encouraged  prayers  for  the  dead.  They  have  attributed 
efficacy  to  the  prayers  of  the  Virgin  Mary.  They  have 
denied  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith.  They  have 
introduced  tradition,  as  a  joint  rule  with  Scripture,  of 
faith  and  practice.  They  have  preached  the  practical 
infallibility  of  the  Church.  They  have  introduced  the 
distinction  between  venial  and  mortal  sins.  They  have 
favored  the  reintroduction  of  the  confessional,  and  con- 
tended for  the  power  of  authoritative  priestly  absolution. 
In  short,  they  have  embraced  doctrines  of  which  it  is  a 
mild  description  of  them  to  say  that  they  are  Semi- 
Popish. 

Is  this  the  system  of  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer? 

The  question  may  be  answered  distinctly  by  referring 
to  the  history  of  the  Liturgy.  In  the  "Articles  about 
Religion,"  in  "the  Necessary  Erudition,"  and  the  "Pious 
Institution  of  a  Christian  Man,"  most  of  the  doctrines 
of  the  Romish  Church,  with  the  exception  of  the  Pope's 
supremacy,  are  retained.  But  when  the  first  Liturgy 
of  Edward  VI  was  formed,  most  of  them  were  omitted. 
Yet  some  of  those  views  which  belong  to  the  system 
which  we  have  called  Low  Popery  still  lingered  in  this 
first  service.  Had  they  been  continued  there,  it  might 
be  said  that  the  Liturgy  favored  this  system.  But  as 
they  have  been  cast  out,  it  cannot  for  a  moment  be 
maintained.  In  the  first  Liturgy,  in  the  prayer  in  the 
Communion  Service,  there  is  a  thanksgiving  for  "all 
the   wonderful   grace    and   virtue  declared  in   all  the 


62  DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

saints,"  and  "chiefly  in  the  most  glorious  and  blessed 
Virgin  Mary."  This  is  omitted  in  the  second  Liturgy. 
In  the  same  prayer  there  is  a  petition  for  the  dead  that 
they  may  rest  in  peace.  This  is  omitted  likewise  in  the 
second  Liturgy.  In  the  first  Liturgy,  the  words  ad- 
dressed to  the  communicants  on  delivering  the  bread 
was  "the  body  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which  was 
given  for  thee,  preserve  thy  body  and  soul  unto  ever- 
lasting life."  Lest  the  words  should  be  misapprehended, 
and  be  supposed  to  involve  the  doctrine  of  the  real  pre- 
sence in  the  elements,  they  were  omitted,  and  these 
words  used:  "Take  and  eat  this  in  remembrance  that 
Christ  died  for  thee,  and  feed  on  him  in  thy  heart  by 
faith  with  thanksgiving."  This  fact  shows  the  anxiety 
of  the  Reformers  to  clear  themselves  of  any  suspicion 
even,  of  holding  popish  views.  The  same  anxiety  was 
shown  by  another  change.  In  the  Communion  Service 
there  was  a  prayer  of  oblation,  (which,  because  it  con- 
tains nothing  really  objectional,  has  been  restored  in  our 
American  Prayer  Book,)  which  contained  a  supplication 
for  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit  upon  the  bread  and 
wine,  which,  because  it  was  supposed  to  represent  a 
sacrifice,  was  omitted  in  the  second  Liturgy  of  Edward, 
and  never  again  restored  to  the  English  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer.  Now,  take  these  facts  in  connection  with 
the  statements  of  our  Articles  upon  the  sufficiency  of 
Scripture;  upon  Justification  by  faith  only;  upon  sin 
after  Baptism;  upon  Purgatory;  upon  the  Sacraments  as 
signs  and  seals  of  grace,  and  means  of  grace  to  those 
only  who  receive  them  in  faith;  upon  the  wicked  who 
eat  not  the  body  of  Christ  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  and 


DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF   THE    CHURCH.  63 

upon  the  one  oblation  of  Christ  finished  upon  the  cross; 
take  all  these  testimonies  together,  and  it  is  clear  that 
the  system  of  Low  Popery  receives  not  the  slightest 
countenance  from  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church. 

5.  But  it  may  be  asked.  What  then  is  the  system  of 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer?  If  it  teaches  neither 
Calvinism,  nor  Arminianism,  nor  Lutheranism,  nor 
Semi-Popery,  what  does  it  teach?  We  answer  that  it  is 
its  peculiar  glory  that  it  calls  no  man  master;  that  it  sets 
forth  no  human  system.  It  was  framed  by  men  of  large 
learning,  great  experience,  fervent  piety,  and  consum- 
mate wisdom.  They  had  before  them  the  creeds  and 
offices  of  all  times  and  nations.  They  were  familiar 
with  the  writings  and  persons  of  the  continental  Reform- 
ers. Preparing  offices  not  for  a  sect,  but  for  a  nation, 
for  a  branch  of  the  great  Church  Catholic,  they  laid 
under  contribution  the  theological  treasures  of  all  time. 
They  made  selection  of  what  they  judged  to  be  agree- 
able to  the  Word  of  God,  and  the  mind  of  the  Spirit, 
from  the  ancient  creeds  and  liturgies,  from  those  in  use 
in  the  English  Church,  as  well  as  from  the  creeds  and 
offices  of  the  Reformers.  They  were  careful  to  avoid 
all  human  speculations,  and  to  embody  only  the  great 
doctrines  of  the  Bible,  in  the  way  in  which  they  are 
presented  in  the  Bible  itself,  setting  forth  each  truth  in 
its  fullness,  without  binding  it  within  the  chains  of  hu- 
man definitions.  The  spirit  in  which  its  offices  were 
framed,  is  that  wise  and  temperate  one  manifested 
upon  the  subject  of  Predestination,  by  Ridley,  in  cor- 
respondence with  Bradford,  when  both  were  in  prison. 
"Know   you   that   concerning   the    matter   you  mean. 


64  DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF  THE    CHURCH. 

(namely,  Election,)  I  have  in  Latin  drawn  out  the 
places  in  Scripture,  and  upon  the  same  have  noted  what 
I  can  for  the  time.  Sir,  in  these  matters  I  am  so  fear- 
ful, that  I  dare  not  speak  further,  yea,  almost  none 
otherwise  than  the  very  text  does,  as  it  were  lead  by  the 
hand*""  Happy  had  it  been  for  the  Church,  had  all 
imitated  this  wise  and  humble  fearfulness!'  And  this 
moderation  of  Scriptural  statement  of  the  truth  is  the 
reason  why  men  who  have  adopted  human  systems, 
suppose  that  they  find  their  own  scheme  in  the  Prayer 
Book,  because  they  find  here  and  there  expressions 
which  favor  their  particular  views.  The  Calvinist  finds 
in  it  an  Article  on  Predestination,  and  statements  as 
strong  as  himself  would  make,  on  the  necessity  of  pre- 
venting and  assisting  grace,  and  straightway  thinks  that 
he  has  found  Calvinism,  and  that  he  must  explain  other 
parts  of  the  same  book  by  the  sam.e  system.  It  is  pre- 
cisely the  way  he  treats  the  Bible.  The  Arminian  finds 
in  it  constant  warnings  to  take  heed  lest  he  fall,  and 
concluding  that  the  Prayer  Book  sustains  the  idea  that 
we  may  fall  from  grace,  decides  that  it  must  teach  Ar- 
minianism.  It  is  precisely  the  way  he  treats  the  Bible. 
The  Semi-Papist  finds  the  language  of  the  Bible  on  the 
subject  of  the  sacraments  in  the  Prayer  Book,  and  hence 
draws  from  the  one  the  same  inference  that  he  does 
from  the  other.   Are  not  these  facts  evidence  that  the 

SYSTEM  OF  THE  ChURCH  IS  THE   SYSTEM  OF  THE  BiBLE? 

No  one  ever  mistakes  the  meaning  of  the  Westminster 
Confession,   and  accuses  it  of  Arminianism.     No  one 

' '  British  Reformers,  Ridley. 


DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF   THE    CHURCH.  65 

ever  takes  the  confessions  of  Arminian  Churches  to  be 
Calvinistic!  If  our  formularies  set  forth  distinctly  one 
system  or  the  other,  no  one  could  mistake  their  mean- 
ing. But  the  Church  has  avoided  human  definitions  of 
Scripture  doctrines,  while  she  has  set  forth  every  Scrip- 
ture doctrine  itself  in  all  its  fullness  and  all  its  glory. 
This  is  the  boast,  this  the  honor  of  the  Church  to  which 
we  belons.  Let  her  willingly  submit  to  the  ignorant 
reproach,  that  men  of  every  creed  can  find  in  her  some- 
thing to  favor  their  views,  while  she  shares  this  reproach 
with  the  Word  of  God.  It  is  this  fact  which  fits  her  for 
universality.     In  this  fact  is  found  her  power. 

Having  thus  distinctly  presented  the  object  of  our 
inquiries,  having  indicated  the  mode  of  investigation 
proper  to  be  adopted  for  the  attainment  of  that  object, 
having  ascertained  the  general  scope  and  character  of 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  we  shall  in  our  next  chap- 
ter be  able  to  enter  upon  the  consideration  of  the  Morn- 
ing and  Evening  Prayer.  We  shall  be  prepared  to  find 
the  materials  of  the  services  gathered  from  every  quar- 
ter, while,  at  the  same  time,  we  shall  expect  to  find  the 
simple  truths  of  God's  Word  presented  in  glowing  full- 
ness, unincumbered  with  the  rash  and  impertinent  defi- 
nitions and  speculations  of  human  reason. 

This  is  the  system  of  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer; 
this  the  pure  truth  for  whose  maintenance  the  framers 
of  the  Liturgy  perished  at  the  stake.  For  this,  they 
were  cast  into  prison.  Because  they  would  not  recant 
or  disown  it,  they  were  burned.  If  looking  upon  it  as 
we  have,  at  this  time,  as  a  whole,  any  thing  could  endear 
it  to  our  hearts  more  than  its  intrinsic  excellence,  it  is 


66  DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF  THE    CHURCH. 

the  fact  that  not  one  word  of  it  would  be  given  up  by  its 
framers;  that  it  was  baptized,  as  it  were,  in  the  heart's 
blood  of  them  that  framed  it.  When  Cranmer,  and 
Ridley,  and  Latimer,  and  Bradford,  were  thrust  into  the 
Tower,  this,  by  the  description  of  the  good  old  Latimer, 
was  their  occupation.  "Mr.  Cranmer,  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury,"  said  he,  "Mr.  Ridley,  Bishop  of  London, 
that  holy  man,  Mr.  Bradford,  and  I,  old  Hugh  Latimer, 
were  imprisoned  in  the  Tower  of  London,  for  Christ's 
Gospel  preaching,  and  because  we  would  not  go  a 
massing.  The  same  Tower  being  so  full  of  prisoners, 
we  four  were  thrust  into  one  chamber,  as  not  to  be  ac- 
counted of.  But  God  be  thanked,  to  our  great  joy  and 
comfort,  there  did  we  read  over  the  New  Testament 
with  great  deliberation  and  painful  study;  and  I  assure 
you,  as  I  will  ansM'^er  before  the  tribunal  of  God's 
majesty,  we  did  find  in  the  Testament  of  God's  body 
and  blood  no  other  but  a  spiritual  presence,  nor  that 
the  mass  was  any  sacrifice  for  sin."  Beautiful  picture 
of  holy  faithfulness  unto  death,  reaching  forth  for  the 
imperishable  crown,  hung  out  amid  the  flames!  The 
voice  of  this  martyr-spirit  was  echoed  from  another 
prison,  where  another  valiant  witness  for  the  truth  of 
Christ,  John  Rogers,  refused  to  modify  or  recant  the 
doctrines  of  this  our  cherished  book.  "That  we  have 
preached  the  very  doctrine  of  the  Apostles  and  none 
other,  we  are  sufficiently  able  to  declare  by  their  writ- 
ings, and  by  writing  for  my  part  I  have  proffered  to  prove 
the  same  as  it  is  now  often  said.  And  for  this  cause  we 
suffer  the  like  reproach,  shame,  and  rebuke,  of  the 
world,  and  the  like  persecution,  losing  of  our  lives  and 


DOCTRINAL    SYSTEM    OF    THE    CHURCH,  67 

goods,  forsaking  as  our  master  Christ  commands,  father, 
mother,  sister,  brethren,  wives,  and  children!"  And 
from  the  miserable  coal-hole  of  bloody  Bonner's  palace, 
where,  though  cold  and  hungry,  and  almost  dead,  the 
soul  of  Philpot  burned  with  the  fire  that  man  cannot 
quench,  there  issued  a  trumpet-tone  of  joy,  and  victory, 
and  exultation.  "This  is  the  day  that  the  Lord  hath 
made,  let  us  rejoice  and  be  glad  in  it!  This  is  the  way, 
though  it  be  narrow,  which  is  full  of  the  peace  of  God, 
and  leadeth  to  eternal  bliss.  Oh,  how  my  heart  leaps 
for  joy,  that  I  am  so  near  ihe  apprehension  thereof ! 
God  forgive  my  unworthiness  and  unthankfulness  of  so 
much  glory.  I  have  so  much  joy  of  the  reward  that  is 
prepared  for  me,  wretched  sinner,  that,  though  I  am  in 
a  place  of  darkness  and  moaning,  yet  I  cannot  lament, 
but  both  night  and  day  am  joyful  as  though  I  were 
under  no  cross  at  all." 

And  again,  after  having  been  exposed  to  the  pain  and 
ignominy  of  the  stocks,  this  is  his  heroic  exclamation: 
"Better  is  it  to  sit  in  the  stocks  of  this  world  than  to  sit 
in  the  stocks  of  a  damnable  conscience!"  And  after 
Cranmer  and  Latimer  had  been  in  succession  baited  and 
insulted  by  the  commissioners  at  Oxford,  and  witnessed 
each  a  good  confession,  this  is  the  voice  of  stout-hearted 
Rowland  Taylor,  himself  a  prisoner,  which  reached 
them  in  their  bondage.  "I  cannot  utter  with  my  pen 
how  I  rejoice  in  my  heart  for  you;  three  such  captains 
in  the  foreward  under  Christ's  cross,  banner,  or  stand- 
ard, in  such  a  caus-e  and  skirmish.  This,  your  enter- 
prise, in  the  sight  of  all  that  be  in  heaven  and  all  God's 
people  in  earth,  is   most  pleasant  to  behold.     This  is 


68  DOCTRINAL   SYSTEM   OF   THE    CHURCH. 

another  manner  of  nobility  than  to  be  in  the  forefront  of 
worldly  warfares.  For  God's  sake  pray  for  us,  for  we 
fail  not  daily  to  pray  for  you.  We  are  stronger  and 
stronger  in  the  Lord,  his  name  be  praised,  and  we  doubt 
not  that  ye  be  so  in  Christ's  own  sweet  school.  Heaven 
is  all  and  wholly  of  our  side.  Therefore  Gaudete  in 
Domino,  semper  et  iterum  gaudete  et  exultate.  Rejoice 
always  in  the  Lord,  and  again  rejoice  and  be  glad.'"^ 
Out  of  such  hearts  came  the  Liturgy.  For  its  truths 
such  hearts  dared  death.  By  its  influences  were  such 
hearts  moulded.  May  we  catch  the  fervor  of  their 
sainted  spirits!  May  we  not  become  the  degenerate 
branch  of  a  noble  vine! 

''Works  of  the  British  Reformers. 


IV. 


^\)t  iHorning  Jprawcr, 


"The  order  Tor  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer"  is 
the  subject  to  which  our  attention  is  now  to  be  direct- 
ed. • 

I.  Arrangement.  It  will  be  found  to  be  admirably 
arranged  to  meet  the  wants  of  the  soul  when  we  go  up 
to  the  house  of  God. 

The  first  words  which  usually  break  upon  our  ears  at 

'  The  subject  of  daily  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  has  of  late 
been  considerably  discussed  in  our  church.  It  is  contended  by 
some  that  it  is  the  duty  of  every  Episcopal  Minister  to  read  daily 
the  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  in  the  church.  We  are  well  per- 
suaded that  no  such  duty  is  imposed  upon  us;  but  that,  by  the 
omission  of  the  Rubric,  which  is  in  the  English  Prayer  Book, 
whicii  prtsmbedlhe  duty,  our  own  Church  has  released  us  from  the 
performance  of  the  Daily  Service  as  a  duty,  and  left  it  to  be  adopted 
or  omitted  by  each  clergyman  as  he  shall  judge  that  the  circum- 
stances of  his  position  shall  require.  "All  that  the  heading  of  the 
Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  would  seem  to  imply  is,  that  when 
public  worship  happened  to  be  held  on  any  day,  the  following  ser- 
vice was  prescribed."    (Key  to  the  Prayer  Book,  p.  48.) 


'''O  THE    MORNING   PRAYER. 

the  morning  service  are  these  :  "  The  Lord  is  in  his  holy 
temple,  let  all  the  earth  keep  silence  before  him." 
They  are  fitting  words  to  prepare  the  soul  for  solemn 
audience  of  God.  Then  follow  other  and  encouraging 
sentences  declarative  of  the  pardoning  mercy  of  God  to 
the  penitent.  They  are  words  well  chosen  to  uphold 
the  trembling  soul  of  him  who  feels  himself  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  God  whom  angels  hymn  as  the  thrice  holy. 
An  exhortation  to  confession  of  sins  is  then  made.  A 
lowly  and  united  confession  of  sins  follows.  What  can 
we  better  do  in  so  dread  a  presence,  than  fall  down 
with  awed  Peter  when  convinced  of  Christ's  divinity, 
and  cry,  "  Behold  I  am  a  sinful  man,  oh,  Lord"?  Then 
a  comforting  declaration  of  the  absolution  of  the  sins  of 
the  truly  contrite  is  pronounced  by  God's  commissioned 
Minister.  With  this  blessed  assurance  falling  on  our 
heart,  can  we  longer  kneel  and  pray  ?  Oh,  no  !  we 
must  rise  and  sing  praises  unto  God,  for  his  tender 
mercy  and  loving-kindness.  But  how  shall  we  find 
words  to  praise  him  ?  "  Oh,  Lord,  open  thou  our  lips," 
bursts  from  the  mouth  of  the  Minister,  and  the  response 
of  the  people  is,  "  And  our  mouth  shall  show  forth  thy 
praise."  Then  swells  the  exulting authem,  "  Oh,  come, 
let  us  sing  unto  the  Lord  !"  The  heart  thus  attuned  to 
praise  and  worship,  finds  further  expression  for  all  its 
feelings  in  the  Psalms  of  David.  Then  is  it  not  in  a  fit 
state  to  drink  in,  with  thirsting  ear,  the  word  of  life 
from  the  sacred  book  ?  A  chapter  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  read,  and  as  we  are  musing  on  the  noble  works 
which  God  did  in  the  days  of  our  fathers  and  in  the  old 
time  before  them,  the  fire  burns  in  our  hearts,  and  we 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  tl 

must  again  sing  the  praises  of  the  all-merciful  and  won- 
der-working God.  The  Te  Deum  waits,  as  a  chariot  of 
fire,  to  bear  our  souls  to  heaven.  Again,  we  listen  to 
the  Gospel  in  which  life  and  immortality  are  brought 
to  light ;  and  again,  we  sing  the  glad  "  Jubilate,'^  or  the 
grateful  "  Berhedictus.^''  But  a  child  of  God  cannot  be 
satisfied  with  the  expression  of  his  own  wants  or  feel- 
ings. He  gathers  together  all  those  precious  truths,  on 
which  his  hope  rests,  and  from  which  his  joy  springs, 
and  making  his  public  confession  of  Christ  before  men 
in  the  use  of  the  .Apostle's  Creed,  he  prepares,  having 
been  engaged  in  confession  and  praise,  to  offer  up  sup- 
plications for  himself,  for  his  brethren,  and  for  all  the 
world.  Bowed  in  prayer,  there  go  up  from  all  the  con- 
gregation of  God's  people,  according  to  the  exiiortation 
of  St.  Paul,  united  "  supplications,  prayers,  interces- 
sions, and  giving  of  thanks  for  all  men."  Fervent 
prayers  for  "/jeacc,"  for  "^/Y/ce,"  for  the  President  of 
the  United  States,  and  all  our  rulers,  are  then  offered. 
The  pleading  Litany  for  deliverance  from  evil  and  from 
sin ;  for  power  to  discharge  all  duty,  and  for  mercy  to 
the  suffering  and  the  sinful,  then  rises  up  to  Him  who 
has  assured  us  that  his  ears  are  opened  to  our  prayers. 
Then,  after  a  general  prayer  for  trust  in  God's  promised 
mercy,  and  a  general  thanksgiving  for  all  the  blessings 
of  providence  and  grace,  and  the  invocation  of  God's 
promised  answer  to  the  prayers  of  those  who  are  gath- 
ered in  his  name,  the  service  closes  with  the  Apostolic 
benediction. 

The  Evening  Prayer,  which  is  similar  to  the  Morning 
Prayer,  with  the  exception  of  the  Litany,  and  of  the 


'J'2  THE    MORNING   PRAYER. 

Ante-Communion  Service, — which  properly  belongs  to 
the  Communion  Service, — will  hereafter  claim  our 
notice.  The  Morning  service,  as  far  as  the  Apostle's 
Creed,  will  furnish  us  with  an  ample  subject  for  our 
present  chapter. 

II.  History.  The  first  Liturgy  of  Edward  com- 
menced with  the  Lord's  Prayer,  without  the  Sentences, 
Exhortation,  Confession,  and  Absolution.  It  was  fol- 
lowed by  the  versicles,  as  in  our  Prayer-Book,  with 
the  addition  of  these  two,  which  are  still  retained  in  the 
English  service. 

^^  Priest.  Oh,  God,  make  speed  to  save  me."" 
"  Jlnswer.  Oh,  Lord,  make  haste  to  help  me." 
After  the  doxology,  in  answer  to  the  Priest  w^hen  he 
says,  "  Praise  ye  the  Lord,"  the  people  are  directed  to 
say,  from  Easter  until  Trinity  Sunday,  "Hallelujah." 
This  was  afterwards  omitted,  and  the  answer  now  is  as 
in  our  service,  "  The  Lord's  name  be  praised."  Then 
follows  in  order  the  "  Venite  exult e?nus  ;^^  the  Psalms  for 
the  day  ;  the  "  Gloria  Pat?-P^  after  the  Psalms  ;  the  first 
Lesson  in  the  Old  Testament;  the  "  Te  Detim,''^  or  the 
"  Benedicite  omnia  Opera;''''  the  second  Lesson,  and  the 
^''  Benedictus,''^  which  has  fourteen  verses  instead  of 
four. 

The  alterations  in  this  portion  of  the  service  when  the 
second  Liturgy  of  Edward  was  published,  were  the  in- 
troduction of  the  Sentences,  Exhortation,  Confession, 
and  Absolution,  and  the  anthem  ^'^  Jubilate  i)eo,"  in  ad- 

*  Me  is  changed  to  tw,  in  the  present  Enghsh  service. 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  73 

dition  to  the  ^'  Benedictus.^'  The  Sentences  began 
with  that,  which  in  our  Liturgy  is  the  fourth,  from  the 
51st  Psahn,  "  The  sacrifices  of  God  are  a  broken  spirit," 
&,c. '  This  portion  of  the  service  is  precisely  the  same 
in  the  present  English  Prayer-Book,  with  one  exception. 
In  the  declaration  of  Absolution  the  word  Minister,  in 
Edward's  book,  is  changed  to  the  word  Priest.  It  is 
supposed  to  be  one  of  the  unauthorized  changes  of  Arch- 
bishop Laud,  which  having  been  introduced  without 
authority,  are  still  continued. '' 

^The  first  Liturgy  had  directed  that  ^' the  Priest,  being  in  the 
quire,  should  begin  with  ii  loud  voice  the  Lord's  Prayer."  A 
rubric,  at  the  beginning  of  the  second  Liturgy  of  Edward,  directs 
that  "  the  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  shall  be  used  in  such  place 
of  the  churcli,  chapel,  or  chancel,  and  the  minister  shall  so  turn 
him,  as  the  people  may  best  hear."  The  place  at  which  prayer 
should  be  read  will  be  noticed  in  a  subsequent  chapter. 

*  Laud  denies  that  he  was  the  author  of  those  changes,  asserting 
that  "  the  alterations  were  made  either  by  the  king  himself,  or  some 
other  about  him,  when  he  was  notat  court."  (Troubles  and  Trials, 
quoted  in  Neal,  vol.  i,  p.  314.)  This  is  an  acknowledgment  that 
the  changes  were  made.  Certain  it  is  that  the  word  Minister,  in  the 
second  of  Edward,  was  not  changed  to  Priest  at  the  revision  of  the 
Liturgy  under  Elizabeth,  nor  yet  at  the  last  one  under  Charles  ;  and 
yet  Minister  ha.s  disappeared,  and  Priest  is  in  its  stead. 

Another  alteration,  which  has  been  ascribed  to  the  Archbishop 
(Laud)  in  later  times,  but  does  not  seem  to  have  been  made  matter 
of  accusation  in  his  own,  was  the  substitution  of  the  word  "  Priest" 
for  "  .Minister,"  in  the  rubric  prefixed  to  the  absolution  or  remis- 
sion of  sins.  It  is  not  easy  to  discover  how  this  change  originated, 
for  on  an  examination  of  the  editions  of  the  Common  Prayer  be- 
longing to  that  period,  it  is  found  that  the  words  were  used  as  if  no 
distinct  meaning  were  assigned  to  them.  The  editions  of  1607  and 
1627  have  "  Minister."  The  form  of  prayer  for  the  fast  in  1625; 
4 


74  THE    MORNING    PRAYER. 

This  portion  of  our  American  service  is  nearly  identi- 
cal with  the  present  English  service.  The  first  three 
sentences  were  newly  introduced.  The  two  versicles 
after  the  Lord's  Prayer,  which  we  have  already  noticed, 
were  omitted.  After  the  Psalms,  direction  is  given  that 
the  Gloria  Patri,  or  the  Gloria  in  Excelsis,  shall  be  said 
or  sung.  The  Gloria  Patri  is  not  enjoined,  as  in  the 
English  service,  to  be  said  at  the  end  of  every  psalm. 
In  all  other  respects,  the  sevices  are  the  same. 

III.  Sources.  The  Sources,  whence  this  portion  of 
the  Liturgy  was  derived,  is  the  next  subject  of  our 
inquiry. 

We  have  already  stated  that  the  introductory  Sen- 
tences, Exhortation,  Confession,  and  Absolution,  are 
borrowed  and  slightly  changed  from  a  Liturgy  compos- 
ed by  Calvin.  The  excellence  of  the  arrangement 
consists,  as  we  have  shown,  in  its  adaptation  to  the 
wants  of  the  true  worshipper.  The  Lord's  Prayer  was 
used  in  the  beginning  of  the  service  in  the  Churches  of 
England,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  breviaries  of  Salisbury, 
York,    Herefoid,"    &c.  ®     "The  versicles   have   been 


and  the  Prayer-Books  of  1632  and  1633,  have  "  Priest."  But  the 
editions  of  1634  and  1639,  again  have  the  word  "Minister,"  and 
therefore  are  sufficient  evidence  that  if  the  alleged  alterations  were 
made  clandestinely,  the  blame  cannot  reasonably  be  imputed  to 
Archbishop  Laud.  Cardwell  Conferences,  237. 

We  do  not  see  how  the  facts  vindicate  Archbishop  Laud.  The 
charge  made  may  have  no  proof;  and,  if  so,  ought  not  to  be  made. 
But  surely  there  is  nothing  in  the  facts  mentioned  by  Cardwell  to 
show  that  Archbishop  Laud  could  not  have  been  the  author  of  the 
change. 

^Palmer's  Antiquities  of  the  English  Ritual,  vol.  i,  p.  217. 


TkE    MORNING   PRAYER.  75 

used  from  time  immemorial,"  says  Palmer,  "  by  the 
English  Church."  The  Glaria  Patri  occurs  h-et[mn\t\y 
in  the  ancient  liturgies,  and  is  here  appropriately  intro- 
duced. The  Venite  exultemus  is  found  in  the  ancient 
offices  of  the  English  Church.  The  use  and  position 
of  the  Psalms  for  the  day  are  taken  from  the  matin 
service  of  the  English  Church.  The  reading  of  Les_ 
sons  alternately  with  Psalms,  is  also  an  ancient  custom 
of  the  British  Churches.  The  Psalms  were  arranged 
to  be  read  through  in  the  order  of  daily  service  once  a 
month.  The  composition  of  the  Te  Deum  has  been 
ascribed  to  St.  Augustine,  or  St.  Ambrose.  It  is  cer- 
tainly as  old  as  the  fifth  century.  The  Benedicite,  and 
the  Jubilate  Deo,  are  selected  from  the  offices  of  the 
English  Church.  Thus  we  see,  even  in  this  short  por- 
tion of  the  service,  the  truth  of  the  remark,  that  the 
Reformers  selected  whatever  they  judged  best  for  the 
public  worship,  retaining  in  their  Liturgy  many  of  the 
prayers  used  in  the  old  English  offices,  and  which  had 
been  retained  in  the  days  of  Roman  supremacy,  and  in- 
troducing large  and  important  portions  of  the  service 
from  the  Liturgy  of  one  of  the  continental  Reformers. 
They  no  more  committed  themselves  to  the  system  of 
Popery  by  the  one  act,  than  they  did  to  the  sybtem  of 
Calvinism  by  the  other.  We  see,  also,  how  large  a 
portion  of  the  service,  thus  far,  is  taken  from  the  Word 
of  God. 

It  has  been  observed,  that  in  the  American  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  some  alterations,  from  the  present 
form  of  the  English  Prayer-Book,  have  been  made.  It 
may  be  well  here  to  refer  to  the  views  and  principles 


IfQ  THE    MORNING   PRAYER. 

of  those  who  composed  that  book,  and  to  sketch  a  his- 
tory of  its  formation. 

We  have  already  described  the  successive  steps  by 
which  the  scattered  Episcopal  Churches  in  the  several 
States  became  the  one  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of 
the  United  States.  The  Convention  of  1785  undertook 
to  make  such  alterations  in  the  English  Prayer-Book  as 
should  fit  it  for  use  in  the  United  States.  "  They  also 
proposed  such  improvements  in  the  service  and  the 
Articles  as  they  deemed  to  be  proper."  -  "  A  moderate 
review,"  says  Bishop  White,  "fell  in  with  the  senti- 
ments and  wishes  of  every  member."  The  committee, 
consisting  of  Bishop  White,  Dr.  Smith,  and  Dr.  Whar- 
ton, prepared  and  published  what  has  since  been  called 
the  Proposed  Book.  From  the  manner  in  which  their 
duty  was  discharged,  it  is  clear  that  the  Convention 
and  the  committee  regarded  themselves  as  having  full 
authority  to  make  any  such  changes  in  the  statement  of 
doctrines,  or  in  the  forms  of  prayer,  as  they  deemed 
advisable  and  important.  Accordingly,  they  proceeded 
to  bring  the  XXXIX  Articles  within  the  number  of  XX. 
A  change  of  expression  was  made  in  the  Articles  on  Pre- 
destination and  Original  Sin.  An  important  change  in 
the  Baptismal  Service  for  infants  was  introduced,  in 
the  omission,  after  the  baptism,  of  thanks  to  the  Father, 
that  it  hath  pleased  him  "  to  regenerate  this  infant  by 
his  Holy  Spirit."  The  language  of  the  framers  of  this 
book  in  the  preface  distinctly  shows  that  they  felt 
themselves  at  perfect  liberty  to  frame  it  according  to 

®  Bishop  White's  Memoirs,  p.  103. 


THE    MORNING   PRAYER.  77 

the  views  held  by  those  who  then  constituted  the 
Church  in  this  country.  They  quote  the  language  of 
the  Church  of  England,  declaring  the  necessity  and 
expediency  of  occasional  alterations  and  amendments. 
They  refer  to  a  commission  issued  in  1689,  to  a  num- 
ber of  bishops  and  other  divines,  for  a  revision  of  the 
Liturgy,  and  enumerate  thirteen  queries  proposed  by 
them,  having  reference  to  the  improvement  and  altera- 
tions in  the  work.  "  When,  in  the  course  of  Divine 
Providence,"  they  continue,  "these  American  States 
became  independent,  with  respect  to  civil  government, 
their  ecclesiastical  independence  was  necessarily  inclu- 
ded, and  the  different  religious  denominations  in  these 
States  were  left  at  full  and  equal  liberty  to  model  and 
organize  their  respective  churches,  and  forms  of  wor- 
ship and  discipline,  in  such  manner  as  they  might  judge 
most  convenient  for  their  future  prosperity,  consistent- 
ly with  the  constitution  and  laws  of  their  country."^ 
This,  and  more  language  of  the  same  kind,  is  retained  in 
our  present  preface  to  the  Prayer-Book.  When,  at  the 
meeting  of  the  next  General  Convention,  this  Proposed 
Book  was  not  adopted,  it  was  not  from  any  idea  that  they 
had  not  power  to  make  such  alterations,  but  simply  be- 
cause the  alterations  proposed  were  not  such  as  met 
their  approbation.  Says  Bishop  White,  our  highest 
authority  on  this  subject,  "  In  the  appointment  of  a 
committee  on  the  different  departments  of  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  Dr.  Parker  proposed  that  the  English 
book   should   be  the  ground  of  the  proceedings  held, 

'  Preface  to  the  Proposed  Book. 


78  THE    MORNING   PRAYER. 

without  any  reference  to  that  set  out  and  proposed  in 
1785."  This  was  objected  to  by  some,  who  contend- 
ed that  a  Liturgy  ought  to  be  formed  without  reference 
to  any  existing  book,  although  with  liberty  to  take  from 
any,  whatever  the  Convention  should  think  fit.  "  The 
issue  of  the  debate  was  the  wording  of  the  resolves,  as 
they  stand  on  the  journal,  in  which  the  different  com- 
mittees are  appointed  to  prepare  a  Morning  and  Even- 
ing Prayer  ;  to  prepare  a  Litany  ;  to  prepare  a  Com- 
munion Service ;  and  the  same  in  regard  to  other  de- 
partments, instead  of  its  being  said,  to  alter  the  said 
services,  which  had  been  the  language  in  1785."  '^ 

These  facts  conclusively  prove  that  the  American 
Church  did  not  feel  herself  bound  to  adopt,  in  a  body, 
all  the  doctrines  and  language  of  the  English  Church; 
but  that,  on  the  contrary,  as  stated  in  the  preface  to  the 
Prayer-Book,  they  felt  themselves  at  liberty  "to  estab- 
lish such  other  alterations  and  amendments  therein,  as 
might  be  deemed  expedient."  We  have  dwelt  upon 
these  points,  not  only  as  necessary  to  a  full  understand- 
ing of  the  position  of  the  Church  in  this  country,  but 
that  we  may  remind  the  reader,  that  if  a  doctrine  be 
proved  to  be  held  by  the  English  Church,  it  is  not, 
therefore,  necessarily  proved  to  be  held  by  our  Church 
also,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  we  have  made  no 
change,  addition,  or  omission  in  the  language  of  the 
English  formularies.  We  notice  this  principle,  because 
we  are  about  to  apply  it  to  that  portion  of  the  service 
now  under  consideration. 

**  Bishop  White's  Memoirs,  p.  147. 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  79 

IV.  Doctrine.  Having  noticed  the  arrangement, 
and  sketched  the  history,  and  indicated  the  sources  of 
this  portion  of  our  service,  we  are  now  prepared  to 
speak  briefly  of  the  doctrine  involved  or  embodied  in  it. 

We  need  not  pause  to  dwell  upon  the  harmony  of  the 
Exhortation  with  the  language  of  Scripture,  of  the  self- 
abasing  spirit  that  breathes  through  the  Confession,  and 
the  fervent  devotion  which  burns  in  the  inspired  an- 
thems and  the  Gloria  in  Excelsis.  Our  attention  will 
be  confined  to  the  Confession  of  Sins,  and  the  Declara- 
tion of  Absolution. 

An  examination  of  our  Liturgy,  in  connection  with 
the  history  of  that  of  the  Church  of  England  on  this 
subject,  will  show  that  our  Church  neither  enjoins,  nor 
recommends,  nor  sanctions  private  confession  to  the 
minister,  but  that,  on  the  contrary,  by  what  she  has 
retained  and  what  she  has  omitted,  has  plainly  indicated 
that  she  has  been  satisfied  to  prescribe  to  her  children 
confession  of  their  sins  to  God,  leaving  to  the  conscience 
of  all  the  measure  and  the  mode  of  confessing  their 
sins  to  each  other. 

In  the  first  Liturgy  of  Edward,  the  Confession  stands 
in  precisely  the  same  form  in  which  it  is  now  found  in 
the  English  and  American  Liturgies.  But  in  the  Ex- 
hortation, read  the  day  before  the  celebration  of  the 
Communion,  the  people  are  allowed  to  use  or  abstain 
from  auricular  confession.  This  is  its  language:  "Re- 
quiring such  as  shall  be  satisfied  with  a  general  confes- 
sion, not  to  be  offended  with  them  who  do  use  to  their 
further  satisfying  the  auricular  and  secret  confession  to 
the  Priest;  nor  those,  also,  which  think  needful  or  con- 


80  THE   MORNING   PRAYER. 

venient  for  the  quieting  of  their  own  consciences,  par- 
ticularly to  open  their  sins  to  the  Priest,  to  be  oiFended 
with  them  that  are  satisfied  with  their  humble  confes- 
sion to  God,  and  the  general  Confession  of  the  Church." 
This  permission  to  use  auricular  confession  was  after- 
wards withdrawn.  Yet  the  Church  of  England  has 
retained,  in  her  service  for  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick,  a 
rubric,  which  directs  that  particular  confession  of  sins 
should  be  recommended.  The  rubric  is  as  follows: 
"Here  shall  the  sick  person  be  moved  to  make  a  special 
confession  of  his  sins,  if  he  feel  his  conscience  troubled 
with  any  weighty  matter.  After  which  confession,  the 
priest  shall  absolve  him,  (if  he  humbly  and  heartily 
desire  it,)  after  this  sort."  Now,  not  only  has  our 
Church  omitted  the  permission  to  use  auricular  confes- 
sion, but  she  has  also  omitted  this  rubric  in  the  Office 
for  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick.  She  has  thus  signifi- 
cantly shown  that  in  no  sense  does  she  sanction  or  re- 
commend private  auricular  confession. 

On  the  subject  of  Absolution,  also,  it  will  be  seen, 
that  she  has  manifested  wisdom  and  moderation,  and  in 
no  way  authorized  the  language  which  is  sometimes 
used  with  regard  to  the  power  of  the  Ministry  to  absolve 
the  sinner.  We  do  not,  at  this  time,  touch  the  ques- 
tion of  the  priestly  power  by  which  absolution  is  pro- 
claimed, but  only  the  force  of  the  act  itself. 

It  is  to  be  observed,  that  the  form  of  Absolution  is 
called  "a  declaration  of  the  Absolution  or  Remission  of 
sins."  And  this  word  declaration^  we  think,  expresses 
the  doctrine  of  our  Church  on  this  subject.  She  does 
not  claim  a  power  on  the  part  of  her  Ministers,  authori- 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  81 

tatively  to  absolve  penitents  from  their  sins,  but  only  to 
declare  and  pronounce  to  God's  people,  being  penitent, 
the  absolution  and  remission  of  their  sins.  Neither  is 
this  a  dii^tinction  without  a  difference.  It  marks  the 
difference  between  a  mere  messenger,  employed  by  the 
king,  to  announce  his  pardon  to  returning  and  confessing 
rebels,  and  a  vicegerent,  holding  delegated  authority 
from  the  king,  to  extend,  in  his  own  name,  pardont  o  the 
penitent.  Our  Church  assumes  for  her  Ministers  no 
more  power  than  that  which  belongs  to  authorized  mes- 
sengers who  convey  the  message  of  their  king.  Herein 
she  has,  as  we  think,  most  wisely  departed  from  the 
example  of  the  Church  of  England. 

Bishop  Jeremy  Taylor  has  truly  observed,  that  there 
are,  in  the  English  Church,  three  forms  of  Absolution; 
1,  the  declarative;  2,  the  optative;  and  3,  the  authori- 
tative, or  that  which  is  pronounced  by  a  delegated 
authority.^  The  Declaration  of  Absolution  or  Remission 
of  sins  in  the  Morning  Prayer,  is  an  example  of  the 
declarative  absolution.  The  form  which  occurs  in  the 
Communion  Service,  is  an  example  of  the  optative 
absolution — a  form  which  invokes,  in  the  way  of  a 
blessing,  God's  pardoning  mercy.  That  which  occurs 
in  the  Office  for  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick,  (in  the 
English  service,)  is  an  example  of  the  authoritative 
absolution.  We  have  already  spoken  of  the  exhortation 
to  a  special  confession  of  sins  to  the  Priest,  which  is 
found  in  that  office.  It  is  immediately  followed  by  an 
absolution  in  this  authoritative  form:  "Our  Lord  Jesus 


9  Works,  vol.  vii,  pp.  308,  309. 
4* 


82  THE    MORNING    PRAYER. 

Christ,  who  hath  left  power  to  his  Church  to  absolve 
(not  simply  to  declare  the  absolution,  but  to  absolve)  all 
sinners  who  truly  repent  and  believe  in  him,  of  his 
great  mercy  forgives  thee  thine  offences,  and  by  his  au- 
thority committed  to  me,  I  absolve  thee  from  all  thy 
sins,  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost.'"" 

This  is  language  which  our  Church  has  not  pre- 
sumed to  put  into  the  mouth  of  her  Ministers.  She 
has  altogether  omitted  this  form  of  Absolution  in  her 
Office  for  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick,  and  has  nothing 
like  it  in  any  other  of  her  offices.  She  has  retained  but 
the  declarative  and  optative,  or  supplicatory  form,  which 
is  of  no  higher  force  than  the  declarative.  Nay,  so 
careful  has  she  been  to  avoid  even  the  appearance  of 
forgetting  for  a  moment,  that  in  no  sense  can  any  for- 
give sins  but  God  only,  that  she  has  not  retained  the 
language  of  the  rubric  before  the  form  in  the  Commu- 
nion  Service,  which,  in  the  English  book,  directs  the 
Priest  to  "pronounce  their  absolution,"  but  has  changed 
it  to  this  modest  form — "Then,  the  Priest  shall  say  to 
those  who  come  to  receive  the  Holy  Communion."  In 
view  of  this  statement,  it  is  simply  false  and  foolish  to 

^"  This  form  of  absolution  is  thus  vindicated  in  the  "answer  of 
the  Bishops  to  the  exception  of  the  Ministers"  at  the  Savoy  Con- 
ference. The  form  of  absolution  in  the  Liturgy  is  more  agreeable 
to  the  Scriptures  than  that  which  they  desire,  it  being  said  in  John 
X  :  "Whose  sins  you  remit  they  are  remitted,"  not  Whose  sins  you 
pronounce  remitted  ;  and  the  condition  needs  not  to  be  expressed, 
being  always  necessarily  understood. — CardweWs  Conferences,  p. 
361. 


THE    MORNING    PRATER.  83 

say  of  our  Church,  that  she  usurps  God's  prerogative 
of  forgiving  sins.  That  the  Church  of  England  has 
laid  herself  open  to  charges  upon  this  subject  which  do 
not  apply  to  us,  is  from  this  history  clear.  Indeed,  we 
cannot  but  think,  that  the  Church  of  England,  by  re- 
taining this  portion  of  the  Olfice  for  the  Visitation  of 
the  Sick,  has  inadvertently  sanctioned  a  doctrine,  not 
elsewhere  claimed  by  her,  and  not  claimed  for  her  by 
the  best  expositors  of  her  views. 

The  testimony  of  Bishop  Jewel,  in  his  Apology, — 
which,  says  Bishop  VVhittingham,  of  Maryland,  "bears 
nearly  the  same  relation  to  the  Church  of  England,  as 
is  possessed  with  regard  to  the  Lutheran  Church  of 
Germany  by  the  symbolical  books," — is  very  clear  and 
explicit.  He  does  not  claim  for  the  Church  of  England 
the  power  of  authoritative  absolution.  This  is  his  lan- 
guage :  "And  we  say  that  the  office  of  loosing  consisteth 
in  this  point,  that  the  Minister,  either  by  the  preaching 
of  the  Gospel,  ofFereth  the  merits  of  Christ,  and  full 
pardon,  to  such  as  have  lowly  and  contrite  hearts,  and 
do  unfeignedly  repent  themselves,  pronouncing  unto 
the  same  a  sure  and  undoubted  forgiveness  of  their 
sins,  and  hope  of  everlasting  salvation:  or  else  that  the 
same  Minister,  when  any  have  offended  their  brothers' 
minds  with  some  great  offence,  or  notable  and  open  crime, 
whereby  the}^  have,  as  it  were,  banished  and  made  them- 
selves strangers  from  the  common  fellowship  and  body 
of  Christ — then,  after  perfect  amendment  of  such  per- 
sons, doth  reconcile  them  and  bring  them  home  again,  and 
restore  them  to  the  company  and  unity  of  the  faithful." 
Here  the  Bishop  speaks  of  a  declaration  of  the  terms  of 


84  THE    MORNING    PRAYER. 

pardon  to  the  penitent,  and  of  the  readmission  of  ex- 
pelled communicants,  as  descriptive  of  the  Church's 
power  of  Absolution. 

The  truth  is,  that  to  contend  for  a  power  of  authori- 
tative absolution,  is  to  contend  for  that  which,  in  its 
nature,  is  impossible.  The  power  of  authoritative  ab- 
solution cannot  be  committed  to  man;  because  the  only 
condition  upon  which  it  is  possible  to  exercise  it,  is  one 
which  man  cannot  possess.  If  man  be  commissioned 
to  pardon, — to  say,  '■'■I  absolve  thee,''^ — then  he  must  be 
gifted  also  with  the  divine  faculty  of  knowing  that  the 
individual  whom  he  absolves  is  truly  penitent,  because, 
on  this  condition  alone,  can  sins  be  forgiven.  This 
power,  then,  it  is  not  possible  that  man  should  exercise. 
Nor  can  any  intermediate  power,  between  that  of  au- 
thoritative declaration  and  authoritative  abaoluiion,  be 
attributed  to  the  Minister  of  God.  It  must  be  an  abso- 
lute or  a  conditional  act.  If  absolute,  omniscience  is 
required.  If  conditional,  it  can  be  but  a  declaration  of 
that  which  is  suspended  on  the  fulfilment  of  the  condi 
tion.  This  is  but  an  authoritative  declaration.  This 
point  has  been  argued  with  consummate  ability  and 
convincing  clearness,  by  Bishop  Taylor,  in  his  "Ductor 
Dubitantium."  The  following  passages  contain  the 
substance  of  his  argument  on  the  subject;  an  argument 
which  is  hardly  to  be  reconciled  with  his  statements 
upon  the  subject  of  Absolution,  to  which  we  have  already 
referred.  "The  soul  is  not,  cannot  be,  properly  subject 
to  any  jurisdiction  but  that  of  God.  Now,  none  can  give 
laws  to  souls  but  God;  he  only  is  Lord  of  wills  and  un- 
derstandings; and  therefore  none  can  give  judgment  or 


THF    MORNING    PRAYER.  85 

restraint  to  souls  but  God.  But  as  by  preaching,  the 
ecclesiastical  state  does  imitate  the  legislation  of  God, 
so  by  the  power  of  the  keys,  she  does  imitate  his  juris- 
diction. For  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  by  the  sermons 
of  the  Gospel,  the  ecclesiastics  give  law  to  the  Church; 
that  is,  they  declare  the  laws  of  God;  and  by  the  use  of 
the  keys,  they  also  declare  the  divine  jurisdiction."" 

"But  the  use  of  the  keys  does  differ  from  proper 
jurisdiction  in  this  great  thing.  That  if  the  keys  be 
rightly  used,  they  do  bind  or  loose  respectively;  but 
if  they  err,  they  do  nothing  upon  the  subject,  they 
neither  bind  nor  loose.  Now,  in  proper  jurisdiction  it 
is  far  otherwise;  for,  right  or  wrong,  if  a  man  be  con- 
demned, he  shall  die  for  it;  and  if  he  be  hanged,  he  is 
hanged.'"* 

This  sober  and  Scriptural  view  of  the  subject  will 
prevent  us  alike,  from  too  highly  exalting,  and  from  too 
lightly  regarding,  the  power  of  binding  and  of  loosing, 
committed  to  the  Ministry  of  Chris*. 

Our  sense  of  the  danger  of  regarding  a  Ministry,  as 
the  possessors  of  an  authoritative  and  absolute  power  of 
pardoning  sin,  we  have  no  words  fully  to  express.  If 
the  voice  of  the  past  could  reach  us,  its  testimonies  on 
the  subject  would  appal  the  heart.  Sinful  man  cannot 
suppose  himself  the  possessor  of  this  fearful  power, 
without  finding  that  the  demon  which  sleeps  or  wakes 
in  every  man's  heart,  rises  and  laughs  outright,  and 
seizes  a  fiery  sceptre  and  mounts  the  soul's  throne,  and 


"Taylor's  Ductor  Dubitantium,  lib.  3,  chap.  4,  §  11. 
'Md.,§12. 


86  THE    MORNING    PRAYER. 

reigns  henceforth  inexorable  and  supreme.  Such  a 
privilege  and  power  were  too  much  even  for  a  good 
man,  while  there  is  within  him  a  principle  of  pride  and 
selfishness  and  love  of  rule,  to  which  it  might  appeal. 
Why,  the  holy  Apostle  Paul,  when  he  was  permitted 
but  to  see  those  heavenh'  things,  which  it  was  not  law- 
ful for  him  to  describe,  needed  a  buffeting  from  Satan, 
and  a  thorn  in  the  flesh,  lest  he  should  be  exalted  above 
measure.  But  to  have  the  power  and  the  prerogative 
of  Heaven,  bestowed  on  a  body  of  men,  among  whom 
there  are  not  many  St.  Pauls — what  would  it  be  but  to 
place  the  sword  of  Michael  in  the  hand  of  Lucifer? 
True,  the  time  is  past,  when  an  arrogant  and  cruel 
priest,  could,  by  his  spoken  excommunication,  breathe 
over  his  victim  a  moral  leprosy;  deprive  him  of  every 
means  of  grace  and  every  hope  of  glory;  cut  him  off 
from  human  converse  and  human  sympathy;  rob  him  in 
life  of  all  that  makes  life  tolerable,  and  at  death  cast 
out  his  unburied  body  for  the  ravens,  and  give  his  name 
to  execration  and  to  infamy.'^  But  restore  this  power 
to  the  Priesthood,  and  the  time  may  come  again.  Re- 
store this  power  to  the  Priesthood,  and  the  injury  which 
would  ensue  to  them,  and  the  terror  and  agony  of  the 
hearts  which  would  cower  under  the  power  of  God, 
wielded  by  the  hand  of  sinful  man,  no  language  could 
portray.  God  have  mercy  on  the  people  whose  sins  are 
forgiven  them  by  men! 

Nor  let  us  look  at  the  power  of  an  authoritative  decla- 
ration of  absolution,  as  one  which  is  to  be  regarded  with 

"See  Hallam's  Middle  Ages. 


THE    MORNING   PRAYER.  87 

low  esteem.     Some  cast  the  reproach  upon  this  view, 
that  it  makes  the  power  of  binding  and  loosing,  com- 
mitted to  the  Ministry,  no  more  than  a  power  to  pro- 
claim the  terms  of  pardon — no  more,  in  short,  than  the 
power  committed  to  them  of  preaching  salvation  through 
the  cross.     And  is  that  a  power  to  be  lightly  esteemed? 
Is  the  assurance  of  salvation,  given  by  a  commissioned 
and  accredited  ambassador,   to  be  regarded  with  indif- 
ference?    What  would  we  have  more?     What  can  we 
have  more?  We  must  either  receive  an  absolute  pardon, 
or  we  must  receive  the  authorized  proclamation  of  the 
terms  of  pardon.    As  the  first  is  a  power  not  committed 
to  man,  because  it  could  not  be  exercised — the  latter 
power  is  the  only  one   that  remains.     And   that   is  a 
blessed  one  for  the  heart.     That  is  sufHcient.     That  is 
pronounced  under  circumstances  which  are  calculated 
to  give  to  the  heart  deep,  sweet  pev  ce.     If  condemned 
criminals  hear  a  rumor  that  their  pardon  has  been  pro- 
nounced by  a  merciful  government,  on  certain  condi- 
tions, the  mere  rumor  awakens  joyful  hope.     If,  from 
their  prison-house,  they  hear  the  authorized  heralds  pro- 
claiming those  good  tidings,  their  hope  heightens  into 
glad  assurance.     But  if,  under  circumstances  calculated 
to  impress   the   solemnity  and   blessedness  of  the  act 
deeply  on  their  minds,  they  are  ushered  into  the  august 
presence  of  the  offended  power,  and  there  with  united 
voice    confess  their   transgressions,  and  assent  to  the 
terms  of  pardon;  then  they  feel  most  deeply  grateful, 
when  the  authorized  heralds  proclaim  that  their  penalty 
is  remitted,  their  offence  pardoned.  Similar  are  the  feel- 
ings of  the  pardoned  sinner,  when  the  sentence  of  abso- 


88  THE    MORNING    PRAYER. 

lution  is  pronounced.  He  comes  into  God's  holy  temple, 
where  his  special  presence  is;  and  there,  with  fellow- 
sinners,  audibly  confesses  his  transgressions,  and  renews 
his  consecration;  and  it  is  with  no  ordinary  emotion  that 
he  hears  God's  commissioned  Minister  declare — not,  / 
absolve  thee,  but,  "He  pardoneth  and  absolveth  all  those 
who  truly  repent  and  unfeignedly  believe  his  Holy 
Gospel."  If  he  is  corscious  that  he  complies  with  the 
conditions,  he  may  appropriate  the  promise! 


V. 


(Ill)c  ittornlng  JJrapcr. 


CONTINDED. 


In  our  last  chapter  we  noticed  the  admirable  arrange- 
ment of  the  Morning  Prayer;  sketched  the  history  and 
traced  the  sources  of  that  portion  of  it  which  extends  to 
the  Apostle's  Creed,  and  unfolded  the  doctrine  of  our 
Church  on  the  subject  of  Confession  and  Absolution. 
We  now  turn  our  attention  to  the  Psalter,  the  Lessons, 
the  Creeds,  the  Litany,  and  the  concluding  prayers. 

One  of  the  most  delightful  portions  of  our  daily  service 
is  the  use  of  the  Psalms  of  David.  Every  experience  of 
joy  and  sorrow,  of  comfort  and  perplexity,  of  assurance 
and  of  doubt,  of  rapture  soaring  to  the  gate  of  heaven, 
and  of  gloom  sinking  to  the  gate  of  death,  is  here  most 
vividly  portrayed.  They  have  ever  furnished  to  the 
Church  her  choicest  expressions  of  devotional  feeling. 
The  custom  of  having  them  read  over  once  a  month  is 
very  ancient.  Says  St.  Chrysostom,  speaking  of  this 
custom,  "In  the  Church's  vigils,  the  first,  the  midst, 
and  the  last,  are  David's  Psalms.  In  the  morning, 
David's  Psalms  are  sought  for,  and  the  first,  the  midst, 
and  the  last,  is  David,     And  in  funeral  solemnities,  the 


90  THE    MORNING    PRAYER. 

first,  the  midst,  and  the  last,  is  David.  In  private  houses 
where  the  virgins  spin,  the  first,  the  midst,  and  the  last, 
is  David.  "1 

The  Psalter. 

The  arrangement  of  the  Psalter  in  the  present  English 
Liturgy  and  in  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is  the  same 
as  was  established  at  its  first  formation.  The  translation 
which  was  made  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII,  is  retained. 
Besides  the  Psalter,  regularly  divided,  as  it  is  in  the 
English  Church,  we  have  also  ten  selections  to  be  used 
instead  of  the  Psalms  for  the  day,  at  the  discretion  of  the 
Minister;  an  arrangement  which  enables  the  officiating 
clergyman,  under  circumstances  of  a  peculiar  character, 
to  bring  the  Psalms  into  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  the 
occasion.  In  addition  to  this,  we  have  anthems  for  the 
five  principal  festivals  of  Christmas,  Ash-Wednesday, 
Good  Friday,  Ascension  Day,  Whitsunday,  to  be  used 
instead  of  the  Venite  exultemus,  when  any  of  the  fore- 
going selections  are  used.  Bishop  White  strongly  ad- 
vocated the  plan  of  allowing  the  officiating  Minister  to 
use  the  Psalms,  at  his  discretion,  on  the  grounds  that 
"many  of  them  retained  more  of  the  severity  of  the 
legal,  than  of  the  mercy  of  the  evangelical  dispensa- 
tion;" and  that  most  of  the  Psalms  were  "expressive  of 
peculiar  states  of  mind,  none  of  which  could  be  supposed 
descriptive  of  any  body  of  people  convened  on  a  com- 
mon occasion  of  devotion."  The  objection  was  charac- 
teristic of  that  venerable  father  of  our  Church,  whose 

'  Sparrow's  Rationale,  p.  28. 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  91 

modest  and  humble  piety,  and  whose  calm  and  tranquil 
spirit  made  him  fearful  of  ever  using  language  warmer 
than  his  feelings.  The  selections  were  made  with 
a  view,  in  some  measure,  to  obviate  this  objection. 
Though  it  seems,  in  the  abstract,  a  plausible  objection, 
yet  I  think  the  experience  of  the  Church,  in  the  use  of 
the  Psalter,  would  testify  that  it  is  not  well  grounded. 
That  which  is  legal  in  the  Psalms  is,  by  the  light  of  the 
New  Testament  which  shines  upon  it,  viewed  in  an 
evangelical  sense.  The  particular  states  of  mind  which 
they  express,  are  those  with  which  God's  children  are 
familiar.  Under  the  peculiar  Lntluence  of  public  wor- 
ship, they  can  live  over  again  the  varied  experiences  of 
the  past,  and  make  them  present.  And  the  very  fact 
that  they  are  expressive  of  peculiar  states  of  mind,  is 
that  which  makes  them  so  dear  to  the  Church's  heart. 
Each  individual  finds  in  them  something  which  he  pe- 
culiarly needs,  and  he  receives  it  as  a  precious  gift  sent 
him  directly  from  his  God,  and  hides  the  good  word  in 
his  heart. 

The  Lessons. 

The  general  plan  upon  which  the  reading  of  the  Scrip- 
tures is  arranged  in  the  English  Prayer-Book,  is  as 
follows:  The  Old  Testament  is  appointed  for  the  first 
Lessons  at  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer,  and  the  New 
Testament  for  the  second  Lessons.  For  the  ordinary 
daily  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer,  the  Church  begins 
the  year  with  the  beginning  of  Genesis  for  the  first 
Lesson,  and  St.  Matthew  for  the  second  in  the  morning; 
and  Genesis  again  for  the  first,  and  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to 


92  THE    MORNING   PRAYER. 

the  Romans  for  the  second  in  the  evening.  By  this 
arrangement  the  greater  part  of  the  Old  Testament  is 
read  through  once  in  a  year,  the  Gospels  twice,  and  the 
Epistles  three  times.  For  the  Sundays,  Lessons  are 
selected  appropriate  to  the  several  seasons.  For  Saints' 
days,  the  first  Lessons  are  usually  taken  from  the  Apoc- 
rypha, and  the  second  from  such  portion  of  the  New 
Testament  as  contain  notices  of  their  history.  While 
our  Church  retains  this  general  plan,  she  has  in  detail 
introduced  many  alterations,  which  are  great  improve- 
ments. All  the  tables  of  Lessons  in  the  English  Prayer- 
Book  were  revised  with  much  care  and  labor.  In  many 
cases  the  Lessons  have  been  changed  for  those  which 
are  more  appropriate.  In  the  English  book,  for  most  of 
the  Sundays  of  the  year,  no  second  Lesson  is  particularly 
appointed,  and  that  Lesson  is,  therefore,  to  be  found  in 
the  table  of  daily  Lessons,  for  the  day  of  the  month  on 
which  the  Sunday  falls.  From  this  defective  arrange- 
ment, it  is  manifest  that  that  connection  of  subjects  and 
homogeneousness  of  expression  so  strikingly  character- 
istic of  our  own  service,  and  in  which  so  much  of  its 
excellence  depends,  must  be  often  wanting.  And  again, 
thccselections  for  the  several  sacred  seasons  have  been 
changed  with  decided  improvement.  For  instance:  in 
the  English  Liturgy,  for  the  three  Sundays  preceding 
Lent,  and  for  those  of  the  Lent  season,  the  book  of 
Genesis  is  read  for  the  first  Lessons.  In  the  place  of 
them,  we  have  adopted  the  sublime  and  appropriate 
chapters  of  the  Prophets,  which  expostulate  with  Israel 
for  her  sins,  and  call  her  to  repentance,  fasting,  and 
humiliation.     An  examination  of  other  portions  of  the 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  93 

selections  for  the  Lessons,  would  show  a  similar  im- 
provement. The  Lessons  from  the  Apocrypha,  appointed 
for  Saints'  days,  are  much  fewer  in  number  than  in  the 
English  Liturgy.  I  am  aware  that  they  have  been 
pointed  at  as  shreds  of  the  Babylonish  garment,  which 
are  still  hanging  upon  us.  I  grant  that  we  should  be 
justly  liable  to  censure,  if  we  read  or  appealed  to  them 
as  God's  Word.  But  we  expressly  declare  that  we  use 
them  only  for  instruction  in  life  and  conversation.  Thus 
used,  there  can  be  no  more  objection  to  them  than  to 
the  reading  of  homilies  or  the  preaching  of  sermons. 

This  full  and  frequent  reading  of  God's  Holy  Word  is 
a  feature  of  our  Church  for  which  we  have  great  reason 
to  be  thankful.  God's  truth  is  the  soul's  food.  It  gives 
life,  and  sustains  life.  All  of  it  is  needful  for  the  soul's 
health.  Its  early  records,  its  types,  its  prophecies,  its 
histories,  its  psalms,  its  narratives  of  Christ  and  his 
disciples,  its  epistles,  all  in  their  place  and  proportion, 
minister  to  the  spiritual  life.  Where  it  is  withdrawn, 
there  is  death.  Where  it  is  administeied  partially,  and 
according  to  the  feelings  of  individual  minds,  there  is 
distorted,  unhealthy  life.  If  we  are,  as  a  Church,  to  be 
preserved  from  the  inroads  of  heresy,  from  the  sway  of 
superstition,  from  the  corruption  of  doctrine  and  the 
decay  of  godliness,  this,  we  believe,  is  to  be  our  secu- 
rity. Nothing,  indeed,  but  God's  grace  can  preserve 
individuals  or  churches  from  falling.  But  the  best 
security,  in  dependence  on  that  grace  for  ourselves  and 
our  children,  is  to  hide  in  our  hearts  the  truths  of  God's 
Word,  so  that  when  error  comes  with  her  sophistries, 
and  sin  with  her  blandishments,  those  divine  truths  shall 


94  THE    MORNING    PBAYER. 

spring  from  the  memory,  like  armed  guards,  and  disarm 

these  stealthy  emissaries  of  Satan.   To  have  these  truths 

frequently  and  solemnl}'  read  in  the  public  worship  of 

the  Church,  is  a  great  means  of  fixing  them  in  the  heart. 

May  we  understand  our  privileges,  realize  our  dangers, 

and  duly  feel  our  high  obligations  to  our  own  and  other 

souls! 

The  Creeds. 

After  the  reading  of  the  Lessons,  and  the  singing  of 
the  anthem,  follows,  in  our  service,  either  the  Apostles' 
or  the  Nicene  Creed.  The  Apostles'  Creed  was  first 
introduced  into  the  second  Liturgy  of  King  Edward.  It 
stood,  and  in  the  English  Liturgy  still  stands,  alone  in 
the  morning  and  evening  service.  The  Nicene  Creed 
has,  in  the  English  Liturgy,  always  followed  the  Epistle 
and  Gospel.  Besides  these  Creeds,  the  Athanasian 
Creed,  as  it  is  called,  has  always  been  in  use  in  the 
English  Chuich,  upon  the  chief  festivals.  Our  Church, 
it  will  be  observed,  has  retained  tfie  Apostles'  Creed, 
in  the  daily  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer;  has  trans- 
ferred the  Nicene  Creed  from  its  position  in  the  Ante- 
Communion  Service,  to  the  daily  Morning  and  Evening 
Prayer,  to  be  used  in  the  place  of  the  Apostles'  Creed, 
at  the  discretion  of  the  Minister;  and  has  altogether 
omitted  the  Athanasian  Creed. 

"  That  which  is  called  The  Apostles'  Creed,  is 

•merely  the  ancient  creed  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  is 

no  more   entitled  to  that  name  than   any   other  of  the 

ancient  creeds."^     Its  name   is  retained  by  us,  not  be- 

^ Good's  Divine  Rule  of  Faith  and  Practice,  vol.  i,  p.  9G. 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  95 

cause  it  is  supposed  to  have  been  framed  by  the  Apos- 
tles, but  because  it  contains  the  Apostles'  doctrine. 
That  no  precise  form  of  words  was  left  by  the  Apostles 
as  the  Christian  creed,  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that 
the  creeds  of  the  ancient  church  diifer  in  their  forms, 
and  in  the  number  of  articles  of  faith  which  they  ex- 
press. Scripture  is  silent  as  to  the  production  of  any 
such  form  by  one  or  all  of  the  Apostles.  ^  They  in- 
deed required  a  confession  of  faith  from  the  candidates 
for  Baptism,  but  no  precise  form  of  words  vvas  provided 
in  which  that  confession  should  be  made.  The  Ethio- 
pian eunuch  simply  declared,  "  I  believe  that  Jesus 
Christ  is  the  Son  of  God."  The  Philippian  jailer  was 
bidden  "to  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  The 
command  to  baptize  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost,  was  no  doubt  administered  only  upon 
profession  of  belief  in  them.  Here  we  can  trace  the 
origin  of  the  Apostles'  Creed,  and  of  various  other 
ancient  creeds,  which  contain  an  expression  of  belief 
in  the  prominent  facts  concerning  the  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghost.  It  is  an  evidence  of  the  considerate 
kindness  of  our  Church  for  her  children,  that  she  re- 
quires of  those  who  are  to  be  baptized  a  belief  in  no 
more  than  is  contained  in  the  Apostles'  Creed. 

^  I  suppose  it  will  be  news  to  many  intelligent  readers  of  God's 
Word,  to  hear  that  the  Creed  "is  delineated  and  recognised  in 
Scripture  itself,  where  it  is  called  the  hypotyposis,  or  outline  of 
sound  words."  Such  is  Mr.  Newman's  understanding  of  2  Tim. 
i,  13  :  "  Hold  fast  the  form  of  sound  words  which  thou  hast  heard 
of  mc,"  &c.  This  Creed  is  supposed  by  him  to  be  quoted  by  St. 
Paul,  in  1  Cor.  xv,  3  :  "  I  delivered  unto  you  first  of  all,  that  which 
I  also  received,  how  that  Christ  died  for  our  sins,"  &c. 


96  THE    MORNING   PRAYER. 

The  Nicene  Creed,  so  called,  because  in  its  first 
form  drawn  up  at  the  Council  of  Nice,  in  the  year  325, 
is  fuller  and  more  doctrinal  in  its  Articles  than  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  and  was  prepared  with  a  view  to  coun- 
teract the  Arian  heresy.  Arius  had  maintained  that  the 
Son  was  inferior  to  the  Father,  in  nature  and  indignity. 
This  creed  declared  that  he  was  of  the  same  substance 
or  essence  with  the  Father.  The  creed  which  is  called 
Nicene,  is  more  properly  the  Constantinopolitan — hav- 
ing been  put  into  its  present  form,  by  the  Council  of 
Constantinople,  in  the  year  381. 

The  Athanasian  Creed,  so  called  because  it  was 
long  supposed  to  have  been  framed  by  Athanasius — 
though  that  opinion  is  now  relinquished — contains  a 
fuller  and  more  minute  statement  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity  than  the  Nicene  Creed.  It  was  excluded  from 
our  Prayer-Book,  probably  because  of  objection,  in  part, 
to  its  minuteness  of  explanation,  upon  a  subject  beyond 
human  comprehension;  and  more  particularly  because 
of  what  are  called  its  damnatory  clauses,  which  declare 
that  "  he  who  will  be  saved  must  thus  think  of  the 
Trinity;"  and  that  whosoever  will  be  saved,  unless  he 
keep  this  faith  whole  and  undefiled,  "  without  doubt  he 
shall  perish  everlastingly."  Bishop  White  declares, 
that  if  the  Archbishops  of  the  English  Church  had  made 
the  restoration  of  this  Creed  an  indispensable  condition 
of  conferring  the  Episcopate  on  the  American  Church, 
"the  matter  would  have  been  desperate."  Here,  as  in 
so  many  other  cases,  we  have  reason  to  admire  the 
wisdom  and  firmness  of  the  fathers  of  our  Church  in 
excluding  a  portion  of  the  English  formulary  which  has 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  97 

been  the  source  of  vast  contention  and  of  bitter  obloquy 
and  reproach. 

Here  we  are  led  to  notice  the  historical  fact  above 
alluded  to,  that  some  objection  was  made  by  the  Arch- 
bishops and  Bishops  of  England,  to  conveying  the  Epis- 
copate to  the  American  Church,  on  account  of  our  rejec- 
tion of  the  Athanasian,  and  an  omission  in  the  Apostles' 
Creed.  As  there  has  been  no  event  of  more  importance 
to  us  as  a  Church,  than  the  consecration  of  our  first 
Bishops,  it  may  be  useful  and  important  to  narrate  the 
circumstances  connected  with  their  consecration. 

In  1783,  the  clergy  of  Connecticut  recommended  the 
R«v.  Samuel  Seabury,  D.  D.,  to  the  English  Bishops  for 
consecration.  Failing  of  success  in  their  application  to 
that  quarter,  he  applied  to  the  Non-juring  Bishops  of 
Scotland,  and  was  consecrated  by  them.  When,  there- 
fore, the  Convention  of  1785  met  at  Philadelphia,  there 
was  already  a  Bishop  in  Connecticut.  Neither  Con- 
necticut nor  any  of  the  Eastern  States  were  represented 
in  that  Convention.  Connecticut  declined  at  first  to 
join  with  the  seven  States  then  met  in  Convention,  on 
the  ground  of  objection  to  some  of  the  provisions  of  the 
proposed  constitution.  They  objected  that  the  power  of 
Bishops  was  too  much  circumscribed,  and  that  the  laity 
were  allowed  a  seat  and  voice  in  Conventions.  Such 
was  the  state  of  things  when  the  Convention  of  1785 
applied  to  the  Archbishops  and  Bishops  of  England  for 
the  Episcopacy.  Their  address  Avas  forwarded  to  John 
Adams,  then  minister  at  the  British  court,  and  by  him 
presented  and  recommended.  In  the  spring  of  1786, 
the  committee  received  an  answer  to  their  letter  from  two 
5 


9S  THE    MORNING    PRAYER. 

Archbishops  and  eighteen  of  the  twenty-four  Bishops  of 
England,  declaring  their  wish  to  comply  with  the  appli- 
cation, but  delaying  measures  to  that  effect  until  they 
should  have  seen  the  proposed  alterations  in  the  doctrine, 
discipline,  and  worship  of  the  Church;  as  they  had  been 
led  to  fear,  from  private  sources  of  information,  that 
essential  deviations  from  the  Church  of  England  were 
about  to  be  made.  Not  long  after,  the  committee  re- 
ceived another  letter  from  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury 
and  York,  to  whom  the  management  of  the  business  had 
been  left,  in  which  they  express  their  dissatisfaction  at 
the  omission  of  the  Nicene  and  Athanasian  Creeds,  and 
of  the  descent  into  hell  in  the  Apostles'  Creed.  They 
objected,  also,  to  an  article  in  the  constitution  which 
they  erroneously  supposed  subjected  future  Bishops  to  a 
trial  by  Presbyters  and  laymen.  After  the  receipt  of 
tne  first  letter,  the  General  Convention  reassembled  in 
Philadelphia,  on  the  20th  of  June,  17S6,  at  which  time 
another  address  was  prepared  and  sent  to  the  English 
prelates,  in  which  they  acknowledge  their  friendly  and 
affectionate  letter,  and  avow  their  determination  not  to 
depart  from  any  of  the  essential  doctrines  of  the  English 
Church.  On  the  receipt  of  the  second  letter,  the  Con- 
vention again  met  in  the  following  October.  The  of- 
fensive article  in  the  constitution  had  been  already  re- 
moved, before  the  arrival  of  the  objection  of  the  Arch- 
bishops. The  omission  of  the  Nicene  Creed  had  been 
regretted,  and  it  was  without  any  difficulty  restored. 
The  clause  in  the  Apostles'  Creed,  of  the  descent  into 
hell,  was  also,  after  considerable  debate,  restored.  The 
Athanasian  Creed  was  rejected.     Thus  all  obstacles  but 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  99 

the  restoration  of  the  Athanasian  Creed,  were  removed. 
Its  restoration  was  not  pressed  by  the  Englissh  prelates. 
A  special  act  of  parliament,  authorizing  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  to  consecrate  American  Bishops,  was 
procured.  The  Rev.  Samuel  Provoost,  rector  of  Trinity 
Church,  New  York,  and  the  Rev.  William  White,  were 
chosen  respectively  Bishops  of  New  York  and  Penn- 
sylvania. On  the  fourth  of  February  of  the  following 
year,  they  were  consecrated  in  the  chapel  of  the  arch- 
episcopal  palace  of  Lambeth,  by  the  Most  Rev.  John 
Moore,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Thus  was  the 
completeness  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  this  country 
providentially  provided  for.  In  1789,  the  Bishop  and 
Convention  of  Connecticut  acceded  to  the  constitution, 
and  the  Episcopal  Churches  in  this  country  became  one. 
Thanks  be  to  God,  who,  by  his  gracious  Providence,  so 
harmonized  the  varying  judgments  of  the  Churches  of 
the  different  Dioceses,  as  to  unite  them  at  last  in  the 
unity  of  the  spirit,  and  in  the  bond  of  peace  ! 

The  Litany. 

That  most  fervent  portion  of  our  service,  the  Litany, 
now  claims  our  attention.  Its  fullness  and  fervor  com- 
mend it  to  the  Christian's  heart  in  his  most  earnest 
moods,  and  shame  him  into  feeling  and  fervor  in  his 
mood  of  coldness  and  indifference. 

The  origin  of  Litanies  in  the  Churches  h  thus  de- 
scribed by  Palmer.  "  At  first,  the  term  was  applied  in 
general  to  all  prayers  and  supplications,  whether  public 
or  private.  In  the  fourth  century,  the  word  Litany 
became  more  especially  applied  to  solemn  offices,  which 


100 


THE    MORNING   PRAYER. 


were  performed  with  processions  of  the  clergy  and  peo- 
ple." "  Socrates  relates  that  in  the  time  of  John  Chry- 
sostom,  the  Arians  of  Constantinople,  being  obliged  to 
perform  divine  service  outside  of  the  walls,  were  accus- 
tomed to  assemble  themselves  within  the  gates  of  the 
city,  and  sing  anthems  and  hymns  suited  to  the  Arian 
heresy,  for  a  great  part  of  the  night.  And  early  in  the 
morning,  singing  anthems  of  the  same  sort,  through 
the  middle  of  the  city,  they  went  out  of  the  gates,  and 
proceeded  to  the  places  wheie  they  celebrated  their 
worship.  Chrysostom,  fearful  that  his  people  might  be 
induced  to  join  the  Arians  by  these  processions,  estab- 
lished them  on  a  greater  and  more  splendid  scale  in  his 
own  Church.  By  the  liberality  of  the  Empress  Eu- 
doxia,  the  people  were  furnished  with  silver  crosses, 
bearing  wax  lights,  which  were  carried  before  them. 
Such  processional  offices  were  called  Litanies.  The 
custom  of  processions  and  solemn  prayers  for  special 
emergencies,  was  borrowed  by  the  Western  from  the 
Eastern  Churches.  The  English  Church  appears  to 
have  received  stated  Litany  days  from  the  Galilean 
Church,  and  formerly  on  those  days  there  were  pro- 
cessions. Later,  this  custom  was  confined  to  one  day, 
on  which  the  people  perambulated  the  bounds  of  their 
parish.  According  to  the  injunction  or  advertisement 
of  Queen  Elizabeth,  the  office  for  that  day  was  to  con- 
sist of  the  two  Psalms,  beginning  Benedic  mea  Anima^ 
&c.,  the  Litany  and  Suffrages,  and  a  Homily  especially 
appointed  for  the  occasion.  This  office  was  recited  in 
the  Church  on  the  return  of  the  people  from  the  pro- 
cession; and,  in  the  course  of  the  procession,  the  curate 


THE    MORNING    PRATER.  101 

was  to  admonish  the  people  to  give  thanks  to  God,  with 
singing  the  103  J  Psalm.  A  distinct  service,  as  is  now 
said  without  the  procession,  is  in  accordance  with  the 
ancient  rites  of  the  English  Church.  Of  the  petitions 
which  are  comprised  in  the  Litany,  it  may  be  observed 
that  they  are  of  remote  antiquity  in  the  English  Church. 
Mabillon  has  printed  a  Litany  of  the  Church  of  England, 
written  probably  in  the  eighth  century,  which  contains 
a  large  portion  of  that  which  we  repeat  at  the  present 
day,  and  which  preserves  exactly  the  same  form  of  pe- 
tition and  response  which  is  still  retained."  These 
remarks,  made  w'ith  reference  to  the  Englisli  Litany, 
are  applicable  to  our  own,  inasmuch  as  there  is  scarcely 
any  other  change,  than  that  of  the  four  petitions  for  the 
king  and  royal  family,  into  the  one  which  contains  a 
prayer  for  all  Christian  rulers  and  magistrates. 

Collects. 

Upon  the  prayers  which  precede  and  follow  the  Lit- 
any, we  need  not  dwell  at  length.  Their  Scriptural 
character,  their  simple  majesty,  their  supplicating  fer- 
vor, are  familiar  to  the  reader's  mind  and  heart.  In 
King  Edward's  book,  two  prayers  followed  the  Creed 
and  the  versicles — that  for  peace  and  that  for  grace.  Our 
Liturgy  and  the  English  retain  the  same.  Then  fol- 
lows, in  the  English,  a  prayer  for  the  king  and  royal 
family;  in  the  American,  a  prayer  for  the  President  of 
the  United  States,  and  all  in  civil  authority.  Then 
follows  the  Litany.  After  which,  follows  the  repeat- 
ed and  responsive  versicles,  "  Oh,  Christ,  hear  us." 
''Lord,  have  mercy  upon  us,"  which  were  of  very  an- 


102  THE    MORNING    PRAYER. 

cient  use  in  the  Eastern  Churches.  Then,  to  the  end 
of  the  services,  the  prayers  in  the  English  and  Ameri- 
can services  are  ahke,  except  that  the  general  thanks- 
gi\ing,  which  is  in  our  Morning  Prayer,  is,  in  the  Eng- 
lish book,  printed  among  the  occasional  thanksgivings. 
All  of  these  prayers,  however,  are  to  be  used  in  the  Eng- 
lish book;  while  part  of  them  are  left  discretional  in  the 
American.  The  prayer,  for  all  conditions  of  men,  to 
be  said  when  the  Litany  is  omitted,  is  printed  in  the 
American  book  in  the  Morn'ng  Prayer,  and  in  the  Eng- 
lish with  the  occasional  prayers. 

The  Prayers  and  Thanksgivings  upon  several  occa- 
sions, to  be  used  before  the  two  final  prayers  of  morning 
and  evening  service,  enable  the  Church  to  meet  all  those 
peculiar  and  more  individual  dispensations,  which  fur- 
nish proper  subjects  for  prayer  and  praise  in  the  house 
of  God.  In  King  Edward's  second  Liturgy,  there  were 
prayers  "for  rain,"  "fair  weather,"  "in  time  of  dearth 
and  famine,"  "in  time  of  war  and  tumults,"  and  "in 
time  of  any  common  plague  or  sickness,"  and  "for  the 
high  court  of  parliament."  These  are  retained  substan- 
tially the  same  in  the  English  service,  and  in  our  own, 
except  that  we  have  a  prayer  for  Congress,  instead  of 
that  for  the  high  court  of  parliament,  and  several  other 
prayers  are  added.  By  comparing  our  Liturgy  with  the 
English,  it  will  be  seen  that  we  have  several  prayers 
and  thanksgivings  which  they  have  not,  having  refer- 
ence to  the  sick  and  the  afflicted,  and  to  those  who  are 
going  to,  or  returning  from,  sea. 

Having  now  sketched  a  history  of  the  Morning  Prayer, 
and  noticed  such  doctrines  involved  in  it  as  seemed  most 


THE    MORNING    PRAYER.  103 

to  demand  our  attention,  we  shall  be  prepared  in  our 
next  chapter  to  take  up  some  of  the  occasional  offices  of 
the  Church.  The  order  for  Evening  Prayer,  being  so 
similar  to  that  of  the  Morning,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Litany  and  the  Ante-Communion  Service,  need  not 
detain  us. 

We  trust,  that  while  these  details  may  have  wearied 
the  reader,  they  may,  at  the  same  time,  "have  strength- 
ened in  his  mind  the  positions  which  we  have  assumed, 
and  confirmed  and  increased  his  love  for  our  formulary 
of  worship.  It  is  evident  that  our  service  is  not  the 
product  of  a  few  minds,  or  a  few  ages.  The  piety  of 
the  past  and  the  present,  beams  with  blended  light  from 
every  page.  The  venerable  remains  of  ancient  worship 
are  everywhere  intermingled  with  the  rich  and  spiritual 
forms  of  later  ages.  From  every  part  of  the  service 
there  go  forth  innumerable  threads  of  holy  fellowship 
with  the  past,  some  reaching  to  the  founders  of  our 
American  Church,  others  extending  to  the  Reformers, 
and  others  stretching  out  to  the  gray  fathers  of  the  early 
Church,  binding  all  together  as  one  in  Christ  Jesus. 
Let  us  remember  that  as  these  things  constitute  our 
privileges,  they  constitute  our  obligations  also! 

And  let  me,  in  conclusion,  having  in  previous  chap- 
ters spoken  the  words  of  congratulation  for  our  privi- 
leges, here  speak  the  word  of  warning.  We  need,  as  a 
Church,  to  be  warned  nut  to  rely  too  much  on  her  ex- 
ternal organization,  or  the  excellence  of  her  services. 

We  must  not  too  much  rely,  as  a  Church,  or  as 
individuals,  upon  the  excellent  Creeds  and  Articles  and 
Liturgy  which  we  possess,  as  that  which  will  inevitably 


104  THE    MORNING   PRAYER. 

secure  the  same  purity  of  doctrine  in  the  living  Church 
as  is  found  in  the  established  formulary.  We  have  been 
accustomed  to  speak,  I  fear,  too  boastfull}^  of  our  Liturgy 
as  that  which  secures  to  us,  almost  beyond  fear  of  loss, 
the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus.  We  have  triumphantly 
pointed  to  those  sects  which,  being  without  the  Episco- 
pacy and  Liturgy,  have  run  into  every  species  of  heresy, 
terminating,  often,  in  open  infidelity.  Doubtless  it  is  a 
great  advantage  of  our  forms  and  creeds,  that  error  of 
doctrine  is  not  likel}'^  to  proceed  so  fast  or  far  as  in  de- 
nominations which  are  not  guarded  like  our  own.  But 
on  this  subject  it  surely  becomes  us,  at  this  time,  not 
to  boast,  not  to  be  high-minded,  but  to  fear.  It  becomes 
us  to  remember  that  churches  with  Liturgies,  and  with 
pure  doctrines,  too,  have  fallen.  It  becomes  us  to  re- 
member that  churches  and  individuals  are  now  upon 
probation;  that  it  depends  upon  their  watchfulness, 
prayerfulness,  and  holiness  of  living,  whether  they  hold 
fast  the  truth,  or  be  seduced  from  it  by  the  watchful 
adversary.  No  external  advantages  can  secure  churches 
against  the  danger  of  falling  into  error.  The  promise 
of  God,  that  the  gates  of  hell  never  shall  prevail  against 
it,  is  not  a  promise  to  the  separate  true  churches  of  the 
Redeemer  that  they  shall  never  fail,  or  fall,  or  err,  but  a 
promise  that  God's  church  shall  never  fail  on  earth; 
that  somewhere  his  true  people  shall  be  always  found. 
Let  us  rely,  then,  not  on  old  and  steadfast  creeds,  not 
on  time-hallowed  and  holy  services,  but  upon  God's 
grace,  given  to  those  who  embrace  them  with  a  living 
faith,  and  use  them  with  an  earnest  heart.  The  spirit 
of  error   and  delusion — there   is  no  disguising  it — is 


THE    MORNING    PRATER-  105 

abroad.  Let  uf  hold  fast  to  our  forms,  and  supplicating 
God  to  till  them  with  his  spirit,  live  and  grow  under 
their  influence.  Let  us  be  not  Churchmen  only,  but 
faithlul,  fervent,  humble,  and  American  Churchmen, 
moulded  by  our  system  as  it  is  peculiarly  our  own. 
Wiser  and  holier  men  than  shaped,  and  were  shaped 
by,  that  sy^tem,  the  world  has  never  seen!  In  a  day 
of  confusion  and  error  and  sadness  for  the  Church,  let 
u.s  go  /and  meditate  over  the  graves  of  a  White  and  a 
Dehon,  a  Moore  and  a  Griswold,  and  by  the  light  of 
their  saintly  lives,  and^beautiful  examples,  learn  alike 
what,  as  American  Churchmen,  our  Church  should  be 
and  do  to  us,  and  what  we  should  be  and  do  for  her. 
*'0h,  Lord,  we  beseech  thee  let  thy  continual  pity 
cleanse  and  defend  this  thy  Church,  and  because  it 
cannot  continue  in  safety  without  thy  succor,  preserve 
it  ever  more,  by  thy  help  and  goodness,  through  Jesus 
Christ,  our  Lord!" 


VI. 


5ittnbaB0  ant  i^olg  Ba^5. 


One  of  the  most  beautiful  and  beneficial  arrange- 
ments of  the  Church  is  its  system  of  Holy  Days.  The 
mind  is  carried  by  it  through  the  whole  round  of  Gospel 
truth,  and  receives  influences  from  each,  which,  when 
combined,  give  to  the  Christian  character  harmony  and 
completeness.  The  great  events  in  the  Saviour's  life — 
each  of  which  is  linked  to  some  eternal  truth;  the  exam 
pies  of  holy  men;  the  various  practical  duties;  and  the 
prominent  spiritual  experiences  which  belong  to  the  child 
of  God — all  are  brought  forth  in  such  wise  successions 
and  in  such  excellent  combinations,  that  only  the  heed- 
less and  culpably  negligent  can  fail  to  derive,  from  the 
yearly  round  of  sacred  services,  the  most  strengthening 
and  sanctifying  influence.  Let  us  walk,  in  spirit, 
around  the  sacred  circle  of  divine  truth,  of  which  the 
Saviour  is  the  centre,  and  at  every  point  we  may  walk 
under  the  beamings  of  his  grace. 

The  Collects. 

There  is  perhaps  no  part  of  the  service  more  endeared 
to  the  devout  Churchman,  none  which  takes  stronger 


SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS.  107 

hold  of  his  heart  and  abides  more  blessedly  in  his  memo- 
ry, than  the  Collects  which  are  connected  with  the 
Holy  Days.  It  may  be  fanciful  to  remark  that  they  have 
always  seemed  to  the  writer  to  occupy  the  same  place 
in  prayer,  which  the  sonnet  occupies  in  poetry.  Each 
of  them  is,  as  it  were,  one  breathing  of  the  heart.  Each 
is  the  expansion  of  a  single  desire  or  sentiment  of  the 
soul.  And  the  language  in  which  this  sacred  feeling  or 
aspiration  is  breathed  forth,  stands  unmatched  for  its 
simple  and  venerable  gravity  and  ardor. 

Nor  is  there  any  portion  of  the  work  of  our  Re- 
formers which  more  signalizes  their  wisdom,  and  evinces 
the  absence  of  a  blind  and  undiscriminating  hostility 
to  all  that  was  practised  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  than 
the  retention  of  several  festivals  and  feasts.  They  had 
seen  the  evils  and  abuse  of  an  undue  multiplication  of 
Holy  Days.  They  had  observed  how  saint  worship  had 
well  nigh  banished  the  worship  of  the  Saviour.  And 
yet  they  retained  only  as  many  as  were  profitable,  and 
cast  aside  as  many  as  were  mischievous,  with  as  wise 
discrimination  as  if  their  minds  had  been  subjected  to 
no  bias  of  partiality. 

The  Collects  connected  with  the  Holy  Days  are,  for 
the  most  part,  of  a  venerable  antiquity.  The  source 
whence  they  have  been  derived  are  thus  indicated  by 
Palmer:'  "  The  majority  of  these  (the  Collects  in  the 
Engli^sh  ritual)  occur,  in  the  Latin  language,  in  the  an- 


'  Orio;ines  Liturgicse.  From  Bishop  Broiiwell's  commentary  on 
the  Prayer  Book,  we  subjoin,  in  Appendix  No.  1,  the  following 
series  of  Tables,  which  show  precisely  the  source  and  mark  the 
changes  of  each  Collect. 


108  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS. 

cient  Missals  of  Salisbury,  York,  Hereford,  &r.,  and 
they  are  also  in  the  Sacrainentary  of  the  English  Chinch, 
written  before  the  Norman  conquest.  We  meet  them 
in  all  the  ancient  MSS.  of  Gregory's  Sacramentar}^, 
as  used  in  the  Roman,  Italian,  and  other  Western 
Churches,  and  thence  show  that  they  formed  part  of 
that  Sacramentary  when  it  was  first  introduced  into 
England  by  Augustine,  first  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
and  in  consequence  have  been  used  in  the  church  in 
this  country  for  above  twelve  hundred  years.  Many 
of  the  Collects,  however,  are  much  more  ancient  than 
the  time  of  Gregory,  A.  D.  590;  they  occur  in  the 
Sacramentary  of  Gelasius,  Patriarch  of  Rome,  A.  D. 
494;  and  some  may  be  traced  to  the  Leonian  Sacra- 
mentary, used  in  the  Roman  Church  about  A.  D.  483. " 

The  Eptstles. 

The  custom  of  reading  an  Epistle  or  portion  of  Scrip- 
ture from  the  writings  of  the  Apostles  in  connection  with 
another  from  the  Gospels,  was  practised  in  the  primitive 
Church.  It  was  formerly  called  '^  the  Apostle."  ^  By 
the  injunctions  of  Edward  VI,  in  1547,  it  was  to  be  read 
in  the  pulpit,  or  in  some  convenient  place;  and  by  the 
injunctions  of  Queen  Elizabeth  it  was  to  be  read  in  the 

^Mr.  Palmer  has  arranged  in  parallel  columns  the  English  text  and 
the  Laiin  extracted  from  the  litursricai  offices  of  the  Church  of  Salis- 
bury,— "with  which  those  of  York  and  Hereford  almost  always 
agree" — from  which  it  may  be  seen  how  large  a  number  of  the  Col- 
lects have  reached  us  from  the  earliest  period  of  the  English 
Church.     See  Origines  Liturgies,  vol.  i,  p.  347-393. 

^  Palmer,  vol.  ii,  p.  42. 


SUNDAYS    AND    HOLY    DAYS.  109 

Cathedral  and  Collegiate  Churches,  by  a  special  reader, 
entitled  an  "  Epistler,"  who  was  to  be  habited  in  a 
cope.  ^ 

"  Almost  all  the  lessons  now  read  as  Epistles  in  the 
English  liturgy  have  been  appointed  tn  their  present 
place,  and  used  by  the  Church  of  England  for  many 
ages.  They  are  found  in  all  the  liturgies  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church  used  before  the  revision  of  our  offices  in  the 
reign  of  Edward  the  Sixth,  and  they  also  appear  in  the 
monuments  of  the  English  liturgy  before  the  invasion  of 
William  the  Conqueror.  It  is  in  fact  probable  that 
they  are  generally  as  old  as  the  time  of  Augustine,  A. 
D  59.0;  since  we  find  that  the  most  ancient  lectiona- 
ries  of  the  early  Church  of  Rome  contain  nearly  the 
same  selections,  and  therefore  Augustine  probably 
brought  these  selections  into  use  in  England.  In  this 
view,  the  lessons  entitled  Epistles  in  our  liturgy  have 
been  used  for  above  twelve  hundred  \  ears  by  the  Church 
of  England.''  We  must  consider  this  more  as  a  subject 
of  interest  and  pleasure  than  of  any  great  importance, 
since  'all  scripture  is  given  us  by  inspiration  of  God, 
'  and  is  profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correc- 
'  tion,  for  instruction  in  righteousness.'  Yet  we  may 
remark,  that  the  extracts  read  from  the  Epistles  are 
generally  devotional  and  practical,  and  therefore  best 
adapted  for  ordinary  comprehension  and  general  edifi- 
cation." " 


■*  Palmer,  vmI.  ii,  p.  44. 

'  I  have  enfleavored  to  trace  ihe  antiquity  of  the  Epistles  in  chap, 
ill,  to  which  I  beg  to  refer  the  reader  for  further  information. 
"Palmer,  vol.  ii,  p.  45-46. 


lid  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS. 

The  Gospels. 

Immediateiy  before  the  Gospel  is  read  it  is  the  cus- 
tom, in  the  Church  of  England  and  in  our  own,  for  the 
Choir  to  sing,  or  the  congregation  to  say,  "  Glory  be  to 
thee,  oh,  Lord!"  It  is  the  only  part  of  our  service  which 
is  universally  practised  without  being  prescribed.  The 
custom  prevailed  in  all  the  Churches  of  the  East  and 
West.  "  When  the  deacon  had  ascended  the  pulpit 
and  announced  the  title  of  the  Gospel,  the  people  with 
one  voice  exclaimed,  '  Glory  be  to  thee,  oh.  Lord!'  " 
The  liturgy  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Scotland  re- 
tains it,  not  by  custom  only,  but  as  part  of  the  pre- 
scribed service. 

The  portions  of  scripture  appointed  for  the  Gospels 
are  for  the  most  part  the  same  that  have  been  in  use  in 
the  Church  of  England  for  twelve  hundred  years. 

This  use  and  position  of  the  Epistle  and  Gospel — 
immediately  before  the  sermon — is  a  very  expressive 
recognition  of  the  source  whence  the  teachin";s  of  the 
sermon  were  to  be  drawn.  It  seems  to  be  a  solemn 
proclamation  to  the  people,  "To  the  law  and  to  the 
testimony  !  If  they  speak  not  according  to  this  word, 
there  is  no  light  in  them.''''  It  appears  to  have  been  in- 
tended to  pre-occupy  their  minds  with  the  truth  of  God's 
word,  that  tiiey  might  with  the  more  profit  listen  lu  its 
explanation  and  development.  It  seems,  at  the  same 
time,  as  an  admonition  to  the  preacher  that  he  beware, 
lest  he  contradict  by  his  teachings  the  authoritative 
word  which  is  yet  sounding  in  the  ears  of  the  people. 
Considered  in  this  connection,  this  portion  of  the  ser- 
vice is  of  great  importance,  and  should  least  of  all  be 


SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS.  HI 

omitted  by  those  who  are  most  earnest  in  maintainino- 
a  harmony  between  the  pulpit  and  the  Word  of  God. 
Rather  let  this  portion  of  the  service  be  esteemed  as 
among  the  most  valuable,  inasmuch  as  it  is  all  from  God, 
and  not  from  man,  and  surrounds  the  soul  with  those 
truths,  and  impresses  it  with  those  feelings  which  fit  it 
best  for  a  right  reception  of  the  preached  word  from 
the  lips  of  the  minister  of  Christ.  How  much  it  was 
valued  by  those  who  first  introduced  it,  is  evident  from 
the  exclamation  of  praise  when  the  Gospel  was  read, 
^'  Glory  be  to  thee,  oh.  Lord!"  and  from  a  similar  excla- 
mation at  the  close  of  it,  which  is  still  used  in  many 
churches  in  England,  "  Thanks  be  to  thee,  oh.  Lord, 
for  thy  Holy  Gospel,"  or  "Thanks  be  to  thee,  oh. 
Lord!"  We  should  most  tenaciously  retain  those  por- 
tions of  the  service  which  make  most  prominent  the 
blessed  Word  of  God. 

Sundays. 

We  have  had  occasion  repeatedly  to  remark,  that  it 
is  less  our  object  to  trace  the  nutkority  foj-  the  usages 
and  doctrines  of  the  Church,  than  it  is  to  ascertain  the 
meaning  of  her  services  and  declarations.  We  shall 
therefore  only  intimate  the  authority  on  which  the  first 
day  of  the  week  is  celebrated  as  the  Christian  Sabbath. 
Our  attention  will  be  directed  mainly  to  the  considera- 
tion of  the  manner  and  spirit  in  which  it  was  intended 
that  that  day  should  be  observed. 

God  has  embodiedwith  the  moral  law  but  one  specific 
enactment— that  which  consecrates  the  seventh  day  as 
holy  to  the  Lord.     The  duty  of  solemnly  and  statedly 


112  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS. 

worshipping  God  is  moral  and  eternal.  The  designa- 
tion of  the  seventh  day  was  a  positive  and  changeable 
regulation.  The  Saviour  as  "Lord  also  of  the  Sabbath 
day,"  seems  to  have  designed  a  change  of  the  day,*" 
which  was  carried  out  in  the  practice  of  the  Apostles.' 

From  the  Scriptures  we  learn  that  this  custom  of 
celebrating  the  first  day  of  the  week,  as  the  Lord's  Day, 
was  established  by  the  Apostles;  and  by  St.  John,  in 
the  Book  of  Revelations,  it  received  the  name  of  "the 
Lord's  Day."^ 

"But  it  may  still  be  asked,  Where  is  the  difference 
between  your  observance  of  the  Christian  Sabbath  and 
the  Jewish?  We  answer,  they  differ  considerably  both 
in  strictness  of  literal  enactment,  and  in  the  severity  of 
the  penal  sanction  by  which  they  are  enforced.  All 
kinds  of  work,  withscarcely  any  exception,  were  for- 
bidden to  the  Jews  on  their  Sabbath,  under  pain  of 
death. ^  Whereas,  all  works  of  piefy,  charity,  and  neces- 
S'ity,^^'  are  in  strict  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the 
Christian  Sabbath,  and  may  be  performed  without  scru- 
ple or  hesitation  by  the  enlightened  Christian,  who 
regards  this  holy  day  not  so  much  as  a  restraint  upon 
his  liberty,  as  a  blessed  opportunity  of  glorifying  God, 

8  Mat.  xii,  1,  12.     Luke  xiii,  10,  16.     Jno.  v,  9,  18,  ix,  4. 
'  Jno   XX.  19,  26.     Acts  xx,  7.     1  Cor.  16,  2. 

'^  Rev.  i,  10.  In  some  of  the  churches  of  the  East,  out  of  regard 
for  the  feelings  of  the  Jews,  Saturday  was  observed  as  a  day  of 
devotion,  but  not  as  a  Cliristian  Sabbath. — See  Wheatley,  (American 
edition,)  p.  196. 

9  Exod.  xxxi,  14,  15.     Numb,  xv,  32,  36. 

'"Matt,  xii,  5,  "piety,"  vii,  9,  13,  "charity,"  1,  4,  "necessity." 


SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS.  113 

and  doing  good  to  his  fellow-creatures;  in  short,  a  be- 
ginning of  heaven  upon  earth,  a  foretaste  of  eternal 
rest."  But  to  attempt  to  revive  the  rigid  severity  of 
the  Jewish  Sabbath  in  a  Christian  age  and  country 
would,  we  conceive,  be  a  returning  to  the  legal  spirit 
of  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  instead  of  follow  ing  out  that 
which  our  Blessed  Lord  both  taught  and  exemplified.'- 
At  the  same  time,  great  care,  self-denial,  and  watchful 
self-examination  must  be  exercised,  lest  the  liberty  of 
the  Gospel  should  degenerate  into  licentiousness,  and 
"an  occasion  to  the  tlesh.'"'"  The  true  spirit  of  Sabbath 
observance  under  the  new  dispensation  seems  to  be  as 
completely,  as  it  is  beautifully,  delineated  in  the  words 
of  the  Prophet:  "If  thou  turn  away  thy  foot  from  the 
Sabbath,  (so  as  not  to  trample  upon  its  sacredness,)  from 
doing  thy  pleasure  on  my  holy  day;  and  call  ihe  Sabbath 
a  delight.)  the  Holy  of  the  Lord,  honorable;  and  shalt 
honor  him;  not  doing  thine  own  ways,  nor  finding  thine 
own  pleas-ure,  nor  speaking  thine  own  words  :  Then  shalt 
thou  delight  thyself  in  the  Lord,  &c."'^ 

The  service  of  the  Church  for  the  Sundays  of  the 
year  aie  in  harmony  with  this  discriminating  passage. 
In  avoiding  Jewish  strictness,  our  Reformers  did  not 
run  into  the  low  views  of  the  Christian  Sabbath  which 
prevailed  at  a  subsequent  period,  when  "a  Book  of 
Sports"  for  Sunday  was  prepared,  by  authority,  under 
King  James;  and  the  continuation  of  wakes  enjoined  by 
a  proclamation  of  King  Charles.     The  language  of  the 

"Heb.  iv,  9.  '« See  Page  96,  (1.) 

's  1  Cor.  viii,  9.     Gal.  v,  13.     1  Peter  ii,  16. 
'Msaiahlviii,  13,  14. 


114  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS. 

Homilies  on  the  subject  is  no  doubt  a  true  index  of  the 
prevailing  feeling  of  the  Reformers. '° 

'*"  But,  alas!  all  these  notwithstanding,  it  is  lamentable  to  see  the 
wicked  boldness  of  those  that  will  be  counted  God's  people,  who 
pass  nothing  at  all  of  keeping  and  hallowing  the  Sunday.  And 
these  people  are  of  two  sorts.  The  one  sort,  if  they  have  any  busi- 
ness to  do,  though  there  be  no  extreme  need,  they  must  not  spare 
for  the  Sunday;  they  must  ride  and  journey  on  the  Sunday  ;  they 
must  drive  and  carry  on  the  Sunday  ;  they  must  row  and  ferry  on 
the  Sunday ;  they  must  buy  and  sell  on  the  Sunday  ;  they  must 
keep  markets  and  fairs  on  the  Sunday  ;  finally,  they  use  all  days 
alike ;  work-days  and  holy-days,  all  are  one.  The  other  sort  is 
worse.  For  although  they  will  not  travel  nor  labor  on  the  Sunday 
as  they  do  on  the  week-day ;  yet  they  will  not  rest  in  holiness,  as 
God  commandeth  ;  but  they  rest  in  ungodliness  and  filthiness, 
prancing  in  their  pride,  pranking  and  pricking,  pointing  and  paint- 
ing themselves,  to  be  gorgeous  and  gay  ,  they  rest  in  excess  and 
superfluity,  in  gluttony  and  drunkenness,  like  rats  and  swine ;  they 
rest  in  brawling  and  railing,  in  quarrelling  and  fighting;  they  rest 
in  wantonness,  in  toyish  talking,  in  filthy  fleshliness :  so  that  it 
doth  too  evidently  appear  that  God  is  more  dishonored,  and  the 
devil  better  served,  on  the  Sunday,  than  upon  all  the  days  in  the 
week  besides.  And  I  assure  you,  the  beasts,  which  are  commanded 
to  rest  on  the  Sunday,  honor  God  better  than  this  kind  of  people  ; 
for  they  oflTend  not  3rod,  they  break  not  their  holy  day." 

An  account  of  the  differences  which  prevailed  at  different  times 
in  the  observance  of  Sunday  may  be  found  in  Hallam's  Constitu- 
tional History  of  England,  American  edition,  page  227,  228.  It  is 
defective  in  fairness,  we  think,  inasmuch  as  it  seems  to  allow  no 
sentiment  in  the  Church  on  the  subject,  which  was  not  extremely 
lax  on  the  one  hand,  or  extremely  .Jewish  on  the  other.  Mr.  Neal, 
with  his  usual  unfairness,  (vol.  i,  page  208,  American  edi  ion,) 
speaks  as  if  all  the  "  governing  clergy"  were  in  favor  of  such  a  loose 
observance  of  the  Christian  Sabbath  as  would  allow  of  worldly 
occupations  and  amusements. 


SUNDAYS  ANn  HOLY  DAYS.  115 

The  lir.st  visitation  of  England,  after  the  accession  of 
Edward,  was  set  forth  under  injunctions  which  convey 
a  scriptural  and  discriminating  declaration  of  the  nature 
and  duties  of  the  Christian  Sabbath.  The  Articles  and 
Injunctions  for  the  visitation  of  1547  declare: 

"That  the  Holy  Day  being  instituted  at  first  that  men 
should  give  themselves  wholly  to  (iod,  yet  God  was 
generally  more  dishonored  upon  it  than  upon  the  other 
days,  by  idleness,  drunkenness,  and  quarrelling,  the 
people  thinking  they  sufficiently  honored  God  by  hear- 
ing mass  and  matins,  though  they  understood  nothing 
of  it  10  their  edifying;  therefore  thereafter  the  Holy 
Day  should  be  spent  according  to  God's  holy  will,  in 
hearing  and  reading  the  Holy  Word,  in  public  and 
private  prayers,  in  admending  their  lives,  receiving  the 
Communion,  visiting  the  sick,  and  reconciling  them- 
selves to  their  neighbors;  yet  the  Curates  were  to  de- 
clare to  their  people  that  in  harvest  time  they  might, 
upon  the  Holy  and  Festival  Days,  labor  in  their  har- 
vest."" 

Our  Saviour's  Festivals. 

The  Saviour  has  instituted  the  commemoration  of  his 
death,  as  a  great  and  perpetual  Sacrament  in  his  Chui'ch. 
He  has  thus  sanctioned  that  instinctive  feeling  which 
seeks  to  commemorate  the  life,  and  deeds,  and  death,  of 
those  whom  we  venerate  and  love  for  their  virtues  and 
their  services  tu  the  world.  The  Church  has  wisely 
yielded  to  the  instinct  of  her  grateful  love  to  the  Saviour, 

"  Burnet,  (folio,)  vol.  ii,  p.  28. 


116  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS. 

by  setting  apart  sacred  days  devoted  to  a  commemora- 
tion of  the  great  eras  and  incidents  of  his  history.  It 
is  a  practice,  the  abuse  of  which  alone  could  have  ever 
made  it  distasteful  to  pious  hearts,  and  which  needs 
vindication  only  in  the  case  of  those  prejudiced  and 
biased  minds  with  whom  the  vindication  would  have 
no  influence. '^ 

"  "  We  allow,  tliat  the  Apostle  Paul  reproved  the  Galatians  for 
observing  Jewish  Feasts.'  But  this,  we  think,  arose  not  from  the 
sinfulni'ss  of  the  practice,  which  he  had  allowed  to  be  indifferent,  in 
the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,^  but  from  the  spirit  which  it  manifested, 
and  the  principle  upon  which  it  was  performed.  These  converts 
from  heathenism  were  deceived  by  the  supei-'stitious  notion,  that  the 
Jewish  rites  were  necessary  to  be  observed  by  Christians,  in  order 
to  their  perfection  in  holiness;  and  that  by  such  observances  they 
would,  in  part  at  least,  be  justified.^  Against  such  a  pernicious 
opinion,  the  zealous  Apostle  contends  with  all  his  pjight ;  and  par- 
ticularly marks  whatever  in  their  conduct  seemed  to  lean  that  way. 
Such  was  the  case  before  us.  But  we  are  not  thence  to  conclude 
rashly,  that  all  festivals  and  holy  days  of  man's  appointment  are 
superstitious  and  vain.  The  Jews,  we  know,  kept  the  feast  of 
Dedication,  in  remembrance  of  the  purification  of  the  temple,  a 
merely  human  appointment,  which  our  Blessed  Lord  so  far  from 
censuring,  himself  honored  with  his  presence.''  Again,  when  the 
Apostle,  writing  to  the  Colossians,  says,  "Let  no  man  judge  you 
in  meat,  or  in  drink,  or  in  respect  of  a  Holy  Day,  or  of  the  new 
moon,  or  of  the  Sabbath  Days,  &c."  *  We  think  he  must  be  un- 
derstood in  the  same  way;  namely,  as  guarding  them  against  a 
return  to  the  Jewish  yoke;  not  against  all  observance  of  Holy  Days 
and  festivals  whatever.  The  Sabbath  Day  itself,  we  see,  was  not 
exempt  from  this  condemnation,  as  far  as  respected  the  ceremonial 
ob-servance  of  the  seventh  day.  But  the  Lord's  Day  Sabbath  still 
held  its  authority  unimpaired  by  the  Apostle's  denunciation.    Upon 

1  Gal.  iv,  10.  2  Rom.  Xiv,  5,  6.  3  Gal.  iii,  3 ;  v,  4. 

4  John  X,  S2.  5  Col.  ii,  16, 17. 


sundays  and  holy  days.  117 

Saints'  Days. 

The  memoirs  of  the  Martyrs  were  preserved  and 
honored  in  the«early  Church,  by  the  celebration  of  days 
devoted  to  their  honor.  This  was  the  commencement 
of  a  practice  which  degenerated  into  the  grossest  super- 
stition and  excess.  Before  the  Reformation  the  names 
of  Saints  crowded  each  other  on  the  sacred  calendar. 
Saint-worship  well  nigh  excluded  the  worship  of  the 
Saviour.  In  view  of  the  monstrous  abuses  resulting  from 
the  worship  of  these  ''gods  many,"  we  should  not  have 
been  surprized,  had  the  Reformers  swept  every  human 
name  from  the  calendar.  We  cannot  but  feel  that  more 
than  was  sutficient  for  the  purposes  for  which  alone 
they  should  have  been  introduced — that  is,  for  holy 
examples — were  retained  by  the  niother  Church  of 
England.  We  are  rejoiced  that  our  own  Church  has 
not  cast  out  the  names  of  Apostles  and  holy  men  of  the 
Gospel  history,  as  unworthy  of  commemoration,  while 
she  has  not  enshrined  those  of  later  ages.  The  sober 
and  rational  views  with  which  these  Holy  Days  were 
continued  may  be  learned  from  the  language  of  Hooker, 
which,  it  will  be  seen,  accurately  harmonizes  with  the 
views  expressed  on  the  subject  by  the  authority  which 
established  them. 

Hooker  thus  beautifully  vindicates  the  practice  in  a 

the  same  grounds  we  affirm,  that  this  inspired  statement  does  not 
affect  the  power  of  the  Church  to  appoint  feasts  and  fasts  for  public 
edification  ;  provided  they  be  not  too  many,  and  so  prove  burden- 
some to  the  conscience,  nor  abused,  as  the  Popish  Holy  D^ys  were, 
to  su]>erRtitious  purposes  and  the  grossest  idolatry." — Key  to  Com- 
mon Prayer,  p.  101,  102. 


118  SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS. 

passage  which  has  few  equals  even  in  his  own  eloquent 
and  lofty  pages: 

"Forasmuch  as  we  know  that  Christ  hath  not  only 
been  manifested  great  in  himself,  but  great  in  other  his 
Saints  also,  the  days  of  whose  departure  out  of  the 
world  are  to  the  Church  of  Christ  as  the  birth  and  coro- 
nation days  of  kings  or  emperors;  therefore,  especial 
choice  being  made  of  the  very  flower  of  all  occasions  in 
this  kind,  there  are  annual  selected  times  to  meditate 
of  Christ  glorified  in  them,  which  had  the  honor  to  suffer 
for  his  sake,  before  they  had  age  or  ability  to  know  him; 
glorified  in  them,  which  knowing  him  as  Stephen,  had 
the  sight  of  that  before  death,  whereinto  so  acceptable 
death  did  lead;  glorified  in  those  sages  of  the  East,  that 
came  from  far  to  adore  him,  and  were  conducted  by 
strange  light;  glorified  in  the  second  Elias  of  the  world, 
sent  before  him  to  prepare  his  way;  glorified  in  those 
Apostles,  whom  it  pleased  him  to  use  as  founders  of  his 
kingdom  here;  glorified  in  the  angels,  as  in  Michael; 
glorified  in  all  those  happy  souls,  that  are  already  pos- 
sessed of  heaven.  Over  and  besides  which  number  not 
great,  the  rest  be  but  four  other  days  heretofore  annexed 
to  the  feast  of  Easter  and  Pentecost,  by  reason  of  gen- 
eral Baptism  usual  at  those  two  feasts."'* 

The  preamble  to  the  act  for  establishing  Fasts  and 
Holy  Days,  which  was  passed  in  1552,  sets  forth  "that 
men  are  not  at  all  times  so  set  on  the  performance  of 
religious  duties  as  they  ought  to  be;  which  made  it  ne- 
cessary that  there  should  be   set  times  in  which  labor 

'"  Eccles.  Pol.  V,  70,  (8.) 


SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS.  119 

was  to  cease,  that  men  might  on  those  days  wholly 
serve  God;  which  days  were  not  to  be  accounted  holy 
of  their  own  nature,  but  were  so  called  because  of  the 
holy  duties  then  to  be  set  about;  so  that  the  sanctifica- 
tion  of  them  (was  not  any  magical  virtue  in  that  time, 
but)  consisted  in  dedicating  them  to  God's  service;  that 
no  day  was  dedicated  to  any  Saint,  but  only  to  God  in 
remembrance  ofsuc/i  Saints;  that  the  Scriptures  had  not 
determined  the  number  of  Holy  Days,  but  that  these 
were  left  to  the  liberty  of  the  Church.  Therefore  they 
enact  that  all  Sundays,  with  the  days  marked  in  the 
calendar  and  Liturgy,  should  be  kept  as  Holy  Days, 
and  the  Bishops  were  to  proceed  by  the  censures  of  the 
Church  against  the  disobedient.'^ 

The  reader  will  observe  in  the  above  passage  that  the 
institution  of  the  Lord's  Day  as  pre-eminently  the  Holy 
Day,  does  not  stand  forth  from  other  Holy  Days  with 
the  marked  prominence  to  which,  in  his  view,  it  is  en- 
titled. It  was  not  an  unusual  sentiment,  of  that  period, 
that  it  was  in  the  power  of  the  Church  to  designate  the 
day  which  should  be  kept  holy  as  the  Lord's  Day,  and 
that  it  was  rather  to  the  uniform  practice  and  the  con- 
sentient legislation  of  the  Church,  than  to  the  example 
of  the  Apostles,  that  the  authority  for  the  consecration 
of  the  first  day  of  the  week,  as  the  Christian  Sabbath, 
was  to  be  referred.^     This  opinion,  however,  in  no  de- 

'9  Burnet  Ref.,  vol.  ii,  p.  191. 

'"Hooker  believed  that,  in  like  manner,  it  was  in  the  power  of  the 
Church  to  set  aside  Episcopjfty,  and  to  organize  the  ministry  in  any 
other  form  should  it  become  necessary  or  highly  expedient.  Yet  he 
held,  of  course,  that  Episcopacy  was  an  Apostolic  institution.  In  1641 


15J0  SUNDAYS    AND    HOLY    DAYS. 

gree  interfered  with  a  just  view  of  the  character  of  the 
Christian  Sabbath,  and  the  mode  in  which  it  should,  by 
divine  direction,  be  observed.  Nevertheless,  this  ad- 
vancing of  Holy  Days  to  an  equality  of  sacredness  with 
the  Lord's  Day,  and  the  injunctions  that  they  should  be 
kept  with  the  s-ame  kind  and  degree  of  religious  obser- 
vance and  abstinence  from  worldly  employments,  must 
have  proved  very  injurious  to  the  proper  observation  of 
the  Sunday.'''  As  there  would,  unavoidably,  be  much 
secular  employment  on  the  Holy  Days,  and  as  this  could 
not  be  regarded  in  itself  sinful,  it  was  natural  that  the 
Sunday  should  be  treated  like  the  Holy  Days,  to  which 
there  had  been  attributed  an  equality  of  sacredness. 
This  undue  exaltation  of  Holy  Days  and  the  prohibition 
of  secular  employment  upon  them,  no  doubt  diminished 
that  strong  sense  of  the  sacredness  of  the  Lord's  Day, 


the  committee  appointed  by  the  House  of  Lords,  in  the  enumera- 
tion of  innovations  in  the  doctrine  and  discipHne  of  the  Cliurch  of 
England,  include  the  following: 

"10.  Some  have  maintained  that  the  Lord's  Day  is  kept  merely 
by  ecclesiastical  constitution,  and  that  the  day  is  changeable." — 
Proceedings  of  the  committee  appointed  by  the  House  of  Lords.  Card- 
loell's  conferences,  p.  27L 

'^And  yet  so  early  as  1536,  the  superior  sanctity  of  the  Lord's 
Day  seems  to  have  been  recognised.  In  an  act  passed  that  year, 
"for  the  abrogation  of  certayne  Holy  Days,  language  is  employed 
which  seems  to  involve  a  juster  sense  of  the  superior  sanctity  of  the 
Lord's  Day  than  subsequently  prevailed. 

"And  sith  the  Sabbath  Day  was  ordeyned  for  man's  use,  and 
therefore  ought  to  give  place  to  the  necessitie  and  behove  of  the  same 
whensoever  that  shall  occurre,  mouch  rather  any  other  Holy  Day  in- 
stitute  by  7nan. — Liturgical  Tracts. 


SUNDAYS    AND    HOLY    DAYS. 


121 


which  should  have  prevented  the  license  which  pre- 
vailed in  the  days  of  James,  and  at  some  subsequent 
periods." 

Fasts. 

The  duty  of  fasting  is  plainly  implied  in  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Saviour  to  his  Disciples.  "  When  ye  fast" 
is  a  phrase  which  involves  the  recognition  and  accep- 
tance of  the  duty.  The  Fasts  set  apart  by  our  Church 
are  of  great  antiquity.  It  is  to  be  observed  of  them  that 
they  are  generally  appointed  in  connection  with  some 
fasts  in  the  Saviour's  history,  which  call  for  our  hu- 
miliation. The  forty  days  of  Lent  enforce  repentance  for 
the  sins  which  made  necessary  the  sacrifice  which  is 
commemorated  on  Good-Friday.  Friday  is  a  perpetual 
fast,  because  on  that  day  Christ  gave  himself  to  the 
death  of  the  Cross.  The  benefit  and  the  true  end  of 
fasting  are  well  indicated  in  the  Collect  for  the  first 
Sunday  for  Lent,  where  we  pray  "  that  God  would  give 
us  such  abstinence  that  our  flesh  being  subdued  to  the 
spirit  we  may  ever  obey  its  godly  motions  in  righteousness 
and  true  holiness."  The  Injunctions  issued  during  the 
reisns  of  Edward  and  Elizabeth,  and  the  articles  of  visi- 
tation  and  inquiry  put  forth  by  the  Bishops,  indicate  no 

**Short,  in  a  note  to  his  history,  (American  edition,  p.  188,)  re- 
fers to  the  fact,  that  dining  the  reign  of  Clueen  Elizabeth,  all  sorts 
of  amusements  were  indulged  in  on  Sunday,  (Strype's  annals,  vol.  3, 
558.)  On  her  reception  at  Kenilwortli,  in  1.575,  tlie  lords  and  ladies 
danced  in  the  evening  with  lively  agility.  {Ih.  5,  202.)  Tiiere  were 
sports  at  the  Paris  garden,  the  Lord  Mayor  was  pre.sented  to  the 
Clueen,  plays  and  interludes  were  acted.  {lb.  5,  211,  485.)  It  should 
be  remarked,  however,  that  the  practice  of  the  court  is  a  poor  ^ide 
to  the  doctrine  of  the  Church, 

6 


iUi  StJJfCA¥§  Am  tiOL¥  BA¥«, 

other  than  the  same  wholesome  sentiment  on  the  sub- 
ject. Indeed,  we  are  led  to  feel  that  too  low,  rather 
than  too  elevated,  views  of  the  duty  were  at  that  time 
prevalent.  More  stress  is  laid  on  its  economical  than 
its  spiritual  bearings.  ^^ 

The  views  of  the  framers  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  are  set  forth  with  admirable  discrimination  in 
the  Homily  on  Good  Works.  After  showing  why 
God  approved  the  Publican  rather  than  the  Pharisee, 
with  all  his  uncomnianded  fasting,  the  Homily  thus 
sums  up  the  uses  and  benefits  of  fasting: 

"  There  be  three  ends,  whereunto  if  oiu'  fast  be  di- 
rected, it  is  thei'  a  work  profitable  to  us  and  accepted 
oi"  God. 

"The  first  is,  to  chastise  the  flesh,  that  it  be  not  too 
wanton,  but  tamed  and  brought  in  subjection  to  the 
spirit.  This  respect  had  St.  Paul  in  his  fast,  when  he 
said,  I  chastise  my  body,  and  bring  it  into  subjection, 
lest  by  any  means  it  cometh  to  pass,  that  when  I  have 
j)reached  to  others,  I  myself  be  found  a  cast-away. 

"The  second,  that  the  spirit  may  be  more  earnest 
and  fervent  to])rayer.  To  this  end  fasted  the  Prophets 
and  Teachers  that  were  at  Antioch,  before  they  sent 
forth  Paul  and  Barnabas  to  preach  the  Gospel.     The 


^^  Another  act  enjoined  the  eating  of  flesh  on  those  days  of  fast- 
ing wiiich  had  been  appointed  by  the  Roman  Catholic  Church. 
The  oliject  of  this  enactment  was  declared  to  be  "  the  support  of 
the  fi.sheries,  and  not  any  rehgious  difltrences  as  to  the  S|iecies  of 
food  used."     Sliorl's  Hislory  of  the  Ckurcli  of  England. 

Similar  injunctions  were  issued  in  the  reign  of  (^ueen  Ehzabeih 
to  tlie  same  pinjiose. 


SUNDAYS  AND  HOLY  DAYS.  123 

same  two  Apostles  fasted  for  the  like  purpose,  when 
they  commended  to  God,  by  their  earnest  prayers,  the 
congregations  that  were  at  Antioch,  Pisidia,  Iconium, 
and  Lystra;  as  we  read  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 

"  The  third,  that  our  fast  be  a  testimony  and  witness 
with  us  before  God,  of  our  humble  submission  to  his 
high  Majesty,  when  we  confess  and  acknowledge  our 
sins  unto  him,  and  are  inwardly  touched  with  sorrow- 
fulness of  heart,  bewailing  the  same  in  the  affliction  of 
our  bodies."  -^ 

The  ecclesiastical  year  commences  with  the  season 

-■'  Hence  it  is  thai  the  greatest  discoveries  that  God  hath  made  of 
himself  to  men,  and  the  most  powerful  efTects  of  the  spirit  upon 
them,  have  usually  been  when  they  were  fasting,  and  so  in  a  right 
disposition  for  them.  Thus  Moses  io«.s  fasting  forty  days  and  forty 
niglUs,  even  all  the  time  that  he  was  conversing  with  God  upon 
Mount  Sinai,  and  received  the  law  from  him.  Ex.  xxxiv,  28. 
Eiias  had  fasted  forty  days  and  forty  nights,  when  God  discoursed 
so  familiarly  with  him  upon  Mount  Horeb.  1  King's,  xix,  8. 
Oar  Lord  himself,  though  he  had  no  need  of  it,  his  body  being  al- 
ways perfectly  subject  to  his  soul,  yet  for  our  example  and  imita- 
tion, fasted  forty  days  and  forty  nights;  even  all  the  while  he  was 
in  the  wilderness  overcoming  the  Devil,  and  had  the  angels  to 
minister  unto  him.  Mat.  iv,  2-11.  Daniel  was  fasting  when  the 
Angel  Gabriel  was  sent  to  acquaint  him  with  the  precise  time  of 
the  Saviour's  coming.  Dan.  ix,  3-21.  Cornelius,  by  whose  con- 
version the  door  of  salvation  was  open  to  the  Gentiles,  was  also 
fasting  when  the  Angel  was  sent  to  instruct  him  how  to  get  to 
Heaven.  Acts  x,  30.  By  all  which  it  appears  that  when  men  arc 
fasting  and  so  their  bodies  are  subject  to  their  souls,  then  God  takes 
the  opportunity  of  manifesting  him.^elf  and  his  pleasure  to  them, 
and  also  directing  and  assisting  them  in  the  way  to  bliss;  and  by 
(•■mspf|uence  that  fasting  is  a  duty  of  greater  moment  than  it  is  com- 
monly thouglu  to  be. — Beveridge's  Sermons,  vol.  i,p.  80. 


124  SUNDAVS    AND    HOLY    DAVS, 

of  Advent,  which  occupies  the  four  Sundays  next  be- 
fore Christmas  day.  It  commemorates  the  first  and 
second  Advent  of  the  Saviour.  The  Collects  for  these 
four  Sundays  are  of  matchless  beauty — perfect  models 
of  lofty  and  earnest  devotion.  The  Ember  Days  occur 
four  times  in  the  year,  and  continue  for  three  days. 
They  occur  on  Wednesday,  Friday,  and  Saturday  after 
the  first  Sunday  in  Lent,  Whitsunday,  the  14th  of  Sep- 
tember, and  the  13th  of  December.  The  Church  of 
England  has  set  them  apart  by  canon- '  as  days  of  fasting 
and  prayer,  preparatory  to  ordination.  In  this  country 
"we  have  no  such  canon,  and  it  has  not  been  found  prac- 
ticable to  limit  ordinations  to  the  Ember  weeks.  Yet  by 
retaining  the  days  in  the  calendar,  the  Church  has  tes- 
tified her  respect  to  this  arrangement;  and  it  is  to  be 
hoped  that  when  the  Church  shall  become  more  com- 
pact in  this  country,  it  will  become  convenient  to  ob- 
serve these  days  with  great  solemnity.  When  should 
the  Church  be  up07i  her  knees^  if  not  before  the  ordina- 
tion of  her  ministering  servants? 

The  round  of  sacred  days,  including  Christmas  Day, 
THE  Epiphany,  the  season  of  Lent,  Easter  Day,  the 
Ascension  and  Whitsunday,  together  with  many 
others  devoted  to  the  Holy  Apostles,  would  delay  us 
long  and  profitably,  if  it  were  not  our  design  rather  to 
interpret  the  meaning  of  those  portions  of  the  service, 
concerning  which  there  have  been  differences  of  opinion, 
than  to  unfold  the  blessed  and  practical  lessons  con- 
tained in  those,  the  sense  of  which  is  not  contested. 

'^  Cann.  xxxi. 


SUNDAYS    AND    HOLY    DAYS.  1*25 

The  determination  ol  oiu  Church  to  keep  alar  fiom 
Rome  is  manifest  in  the  arrangement  of  her  Holy  Days. 
She  rejiders  no  idolatrous  homage  to  the  dead.  She 
commemorates  only  the  life  and  character  of  the  Sa- 
viour, and  her  immediate  and  conspicuous  Apostles  and 
Ministers.  She  does  not  even,  like  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land retain  in  her  table  some  chosen  names  selected 
from  the  crowded  catalogue  of  the  Romish  calendar,  to 
render  to  them  a  partial  honor.-''  May  we  learn  to  fol- 
low God's  "blessed  Saints  in  all  virtuous  and  godly 
living,  that  we  may  come  to  those  unspeakable  joys 
which  he  has  prepared  for  those  who  unfeignedly  love 
him."-' 

^^  There  are  something  like  sixty  names  of  Saints  and  Holy  Days 
in  tlie  English  Prayer-Book — among  them  Holy  Cross  Day,  and  St. 
Dunstan''s  Day,  besides  a  large  number  of  others  in  honor  of  Saints 
whose  names  are  known  only  to  the  most  elaborate  students  of 
Ecclesiastical  history. 

'^''  Collects  for  All  Saints'  Day. 


VII. 


(Jll)c  Corii's  Supper. 


In  the  course  of  our  examination  of  the  sublime  and 
beautiful  office  for  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
the  falsity  of  the  charge  that  it  has  been  drawn  from  the 
Church  of  Rome  will  evidently  appear.  It  will  be  seen 
that  the  Church  of  England  rejected  the  gross  supersti- 
tions and  silly  puerilities  of  the  Mass,  and  with  a  wise 
discrimination  selected  from  the  Liturgies  of  the  ancient 
Churches  such  portions  of  them  as  she  judged  to  be 
agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God,  and  suitable  to  aid  the 
soul  in  commemorating  the  love  and  sacrifice  of  the 
Saviour;  and  added  whatever  else  she  deemed  necessary 
to  give  completeness,  fervor,  and  edification  to  the 
blessed  commemoration.  If  our  own  service  and  that 
of  Rome  have  any  thing  in  common,  it  is  because  the 
latter  has  here  and  there  retained  in  her  offices  some 
fragment  of  the  purer  doctrine  which  she  had  so  large 
an  agency  in  corrupting. ' 

'  The  continental  Reformers  were  not  unfrequently  compelled  to 
show  that  an  absolute  difl'erence  on  all  subjects  from  Rome,  was 
not  necessary  to  the  preservation  of  the  truth.  Fanaticism  has  this 
■:l\Q\%  gyjIogisiTj  eyer  at  }}^pa  i  "  ^qm  is  i^  »})  things  M^F9P^-  "WJlS?- 


THE  lord's  supper.  127 

Upon  comparing  our  service  with  the  present  service 
of  the  Church  of  England,  it  will  be  seen  to  be  almost 
identically  the  same.  The  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Collect 
following,  and  the  Ten  Commandments,  are  in  both. 
The  chief  differences  in  the  remainder  of  the  service 
are,  that  instead  of  the  Saviour's  summary  of  the  Ten 
Commandments  and  the  Collect  in  our  service,  which 
may  or  may  not  be  said,  in  the  English  service  are  two 
prayers  for  the  Queen,  one  of  which  only  is  to  be  offered; 
that  the  Nicene  Creed  which  follows  the  Gospel  in  the 
English  service,  is  not  printed  in  our  Communion  Office, 
and  is  to  be  used  only  when  neither  it  nor  the  Apostles' 
Creed  have  been  said  in  the  Mornmg  Prayer;  that  after 
the  prayer  of  Consecration,  the  Oblation  and  Invocation 
are  not  in  the  EngUsh  service,  and  that  the  prayer  which, 
in  our  service,  follows  the  Invocation,  in  the  English 
service  succeeds  the  administration  of  the  elements,  and 
is  placed  immediately  after  the  Lord's  Prayer.  The 
other  variations  in  the  service  are  chiefly  in  the  rubrics, 
and  are  slight  and  unimportant.  We  shall  take  our  own 
service  as  it  stands,  and  make  it  the  subject  of  inquiry 


ever  is  directly  opposite  to  Rome,  is  thrrefore  right."  Melanctlion 
thus  alludes  to  this  subject  in  his  "  Respomio  ad  Scriptum  conciona- 
lorum  Hambv.rgensium.  de  adiophmis.'''' 

"  Ought  we,  as  in  the  case  of  factious  and  parly  spirit,  from  mere 
hatred  of  our  adversaries,  to  reject  even  those  ancient  usages,  con- 
sonant with  God's  Church, handed  down  from  our  first  parents  ?  It 
was  in  this  spirit  that  a  certain  Cinesias  at  Athens,  used  to  celebrate 
festive  days  opposed  to  those  sactioned  by  the  people;  and  so  the 
Asiatics  sacrificed  swine  and  established  another  beginning  for  the 
ypixr,  merely  to  ?|jt»w  tha|;  |hey  wrf-e  iJiqt)|!r(  froir,  ihe  la)'iielilp^," 


128  THE  lord's  supper. 

in  connection  with  the  present  and  past  services  of  the 
English  Church. 

As  we  have  aheady  mentioned  (he  citcunistances 
under  which  the  first  Communion  OtKce  was  formed,  we 
may  here  take  up  its  separate  parts,  and  give  them  that 
degree  of  attention  which  our  limits  will  allow.  The 
changes  of  phraseology  which  we  shall  notice,  will  be 
seen,  by  the  attentive  reader,  to  be  often  significant  of 
a  desire  to  avoid  or  express  certain  views  of  this  Holy 
Sacrament. ' 

The  name  of  this  Sacrament  is  derived  from  Scrip- 
ture, being  called  in  one  place  "the  Lord's  Supper,"' 
and  in  another  place  the  "  communion"  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ.  '  In  the  first  book  of  Edward  it 
was  called  the  "  Supper  of  the  Lord,  and  the  Holy 
Communion,  commonly  called  the  Mass."     At  the  re- 

*But  the  alterations  of  1552  were  of  such  a  nature  as  to  be  consis- 
tent with  the  belief  that  the  sacred  elements  had  no  neto  virtues 
whatever  imparted  to  them,  and  that  Christ  was  present  in  the 
Eucharist  in  no  other  manner  than  as  he  is  always  present  to  the 
prayers  of  the  faithful.  That  this  important  change  was  actually 
intended  13  evident  from  the  words  addressed  mdridually  to  the 
communicants,  which  may  fairly  be  considered  as  the  cardinal 
point  of  the  whole  service.  These  words  were  no  longer  "  The 
body  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  which  was  given  for  thee,  preserve 
thy  body  and  soul  unto  everlasting  life,"  but  merely  "  Take  and 
eat  this  in  rememberance  that  Christ  died  for  thee,  and  feed  on  him 
in  thy  heart  by  faith  with  thanksgiving;"  and  the  new  form  seems 
to  have  been  suggested  from  the  ritual  of  a  Church  of  foreigners 
then  resident  in  England,  who  were  most  remarkable  for  their  re- 
jection of  ancient  practices  and  distinct  confessions  of  faith. 

Cabdwell's  His.  of  Conferences,  p.  6. 

n  Gom,  %ifm  *l  Com  j^,  IS> 


THE  lord's  supper.  129 

view  of  this  book  in  1552,  the  title  assumed  its  present 
form. 

The  first  rubric  authorized  the  Minister  to  repel  from 
the  Communion  any  "  notorious  evil  liver,"  or  any  one 
who  may  "  have  done  such  wrong  to  his  neighbor  by 
word  or  deed  as  that  the  congregation  are  thereby  of- 
fended "  The  second  rubric  conveys  the  same  power 
to  the  Minister  in  the  case  of  those  "  betwixt  whom  he 
perceiveth  malice  and  hatred  to  reign. "  No  doubt  a 
real  power  of  repelling  from  the  Communion  is  hereby 
entrusted  to  the  Ministers  of  the  Church.  When  they 
perceive  the  malice  to  reign,  and  take  note  of  the  "  no- 
torious evil  liver,"  they  are  to  exercise  the  power. 
But  it  is  a  power  which  they  are  particularly  called  upon 
to  exercise  in  the  meekness  of  wisdom."  It  is  a  power 
limited  to  the  cases  specified.  The  Minister  has  no  right 
to  set  up  qualifications  which  his  own  judgment  dictates 
should  have  been  specified,  or  to  prohibit  what  he  thinks 
should  have  been  enjoined  by  the  Church.  The  recom- 
mendation of  the  Hou?-(.^  of  Bishops  to  all  the  members  in 
communion  with  the  Episcopal  Church  to  abstain  from 
certain  specified  amusements,  *  invests  the  Minister  with 

^EXTRACT    FROM    THE   JOURNAL    OF    THE    HOUSE    OF    BISHOPS. 

"Tuesday,  May  27,  lt<17.  The  House  met.  Present  eis  yes- 
terday. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  following  be  entered  on  the  Journal  of  this 
House,  and  be  sent  to  the  House  of  Clerical  anS  Lay  Deputies  to  be 
read  therin: 

"  The  House  of  Bishops,  solicitous  for  the  preservation  of  the 
purity  of  the  Church  and  the  piety  of  its  members,  are  induced  to 
impress  upon  the  Clergy  the  important  duty,  with  a  discreet  but 
earnest  zeal,  of  warning  the  people  of  their  respective  curee,  of  the 

6* 


130  THE    lord's    supper. 

a  moral  power  of  reproof  and  dissuasion,  in  effect  little 
short  of  law  in  the  case  of  those  who  frequent  such 
scenes;  but  still  it  clothes  him  with  no  legal  power  to 
repel  those  w^ho  are  addicted  to  them,  unless  they  are  so 
far  devoted  to  them,  as  in  the  estimation  of  the  Minister, 
to  be  "  notorious  evil  livers."  In  all  cases,  where  this 
power  is  exercised,  it  is  provided  that  the  Minister 
should  "  give  an  account  of  the  same  to  his  Ordinary, 
(or  Bishop,)  so  soon  as  conveniently  may  be."  This 
regulation  is  taken  from  the  English  rubric,  and  im- 
plies a  power  of  appeal  on  the  pirt  of  the  repelled  com- 
municant. It  is  difficult  to  see  the  propriety  of  such 
a  regulation,  if  it  does  not  suppose  a  right  on  the  part  of 
the  Bishop  to  ratify  or  reverse  the  sentence.  ** 

danger  of  an  indulgence  in  those  worldly  pleasures  which  may 
tend  to  draw  the  affections  from  spiritual  things.  And  especially 
on  the  subject  of  gaming,  of  amusements  involving  cruelty  to  the 
brute  creation,  and  ef  theatrical  representations,  to  which  some 
peculiar  circumstances  have  called  their  attention — they  do  not  hesi- 
tate to  express  their  unmiimous  opinion  thai  these  amusements, 
as  well  from  their  licentious  tendency,  as  from  the  strong  tempta- 
tions to  vice  which  they  afford,  ought  not  to  be  frequented.  And 
the  Bishops  cannot  refrain  from  expressing  their  deep  regret  at  the 
information  that  in  some  of  our  large  cities,  so  little  respect  is  paid 
to  the  feelings  of  the  members  of  the  Church,  that  theatrical  repre- 
sentations are  fixed  for  the  evenings  of  her  most  solemn  festivals." 

The  same  subject  is  enforced  in  the  Pastoral  Letter  of  the  House 
of  Bishops  for  that  year.  The  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of  Vir- 
ginia in  the  year  1818,  passed  a  resolution  similiar  to  that  of  tY\e 
House  of  Bishops.  There  is  a  Canon  of  the  Diocese  of  Maryland, 
with  the  title,  "Theatrical  Exhibitions,  and  other  light  and  vain 
Amusements,  forbidden."  The  sense  of  the  Church  as  to  the  in- 
compatibility of  such  amusements  with  a  Christian  profession,  is 
seen  to  be  distinct  and  emphatic. 

6  Bishop  Brownell's  Common  Prayer,  p.  362. 


THF,    lord's    srpPER.  131 

Bill  though  this  power  be  limited  to  the  cases  speci- 
fied, it  is  still  a  real  power,  not  as  in  the  English 
Church,  almost  nullified  in  practice  by  the  conflict  of 
the  regulations  of  the  Chinch  with  those  of  the  state.' 
Though  in  particular  cases  it  might  seem  that  the  purity 
of  the  Church  could  be  better  maintained  were  the 
regulations  more  stringent,  yet  a  larger  view  of  the 
bearings  of  the  whole  case,  and  particularly  of  the 
power  of  persuasion  and  rebuke  which  the  Ministry 
enjoy,  may  lead  us  to  rest  satisfied  with  provisions 
which  are  framed  in  the  spirit  of  the  Master  and  the 
Gospel,  whose  chiefest  attribute  is  mercy. 

There  is  a  rubric  in  the  English  service,  which  is 
omitted  in  our  own,  which  requires  that  those  who  "in- 

'"A  fruitful  source  of  contention  has  arisen  from  the  collision  of 
tlic  English  Canon  and  Civil  laws.  The  Canons  require  the  clergy- 
men to  repel  certain  offenders  from  the  Communion  without  allow- 
ing him  any  discretion,  any  power  whatever.  But  the  Test  Acts, 
which  bring  so  many  persons  to  the  Communion,  in  order  to  qualify 
themselves  for  offices,  civil  and  military,  make  no  allowances  for 
their  exclusion  in  any  case,  nor  have  any  proviso  to  indemnify  the 
Minister  for  proceeding  according  to  tlie  rubrics  or  Canons  in  deny- 
ing them  the  Sacrament.  And  by  a  statute  of  Edward  VI,  it  is 
enacted  that  'the  Minister  shall  not,  without  a  lawful  cause,  deny 
th«  Sacrament  lo  any  person  that  devoutly  and  humbly  desires  it. 
If  we  inquire  what  constitutes  a  lawful  cause.  Bishop  Andrews  in- 
forms us  that  liie  law  of  England  will  not  suffer  the  Minister  to 
juf'ge  any  man  a  notorious  offender,  but  him  who  is  so  convicted 
by  some  legal  sentence.  And  the  English  civilians  and  canonists 
seem  to  agree  that  nothing  amounts  to  notoriety  in  the  law,  but 
proof  by  confession  in  open  courts,  or  cimviction  by  a  sentence  of 
the  judge." — Bishop  Brownell's  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  p.  361. 
Also  Shepherd,  vol.  ii,  p.  147,  1G4. 


132  THE  lord's  supper. 

tend  to  be  partakers  of  the  Holy  Communion  shall 
signify  their  names  to  the  Curate,  at  least  some  time 
the  day  before."  The  omission  of  this  rubric  by  our 
Church  did  not  arise  from  any  indifference  to  the  qual- 
ifications of  those  who  were  to  be  admitted  to  the  Com- 
munion, but  "probably  from  the  inconvenience  of  con- 
veying the  notice  in  our  scattered  congregations."*  The 
usage  of  the  Church  in  this  particular — a  usage  so  uni- 
form as  to  have  become  an  unwritten  law — is  that 
persons  desirous  of  coming  to  the  Lord's  Supper  for  the 
first  time,  should  make  their  wishes  known  to  the 
Minister.  Indeed,  the  regulations  of  the  Church  upon 
the  subject  of  adult  Baptism  and  Confirmation — which 
in  all  cases  are  to  precede  admission  to  the  Lord's 
Supper — imply  such  a  personal  examination  of  the 
fitness  of  the  person  presenting  himself  for  Communion, 
as  to  make  the  notice  required  in  the  English  rubric 
unnecessary.^ 

In  the  first  book  of  Edward,  the  next  rubi'ic  which 
followed  prescribed  that  in  the  administration  of  the 
Holy  Communion  the  Priest  that  should  execute  the 
holy  Ministry  should  put  upon  him  the  vesture  ap- 
pointed for  that  ministration;  "that  is  to  say,  a  white 

**  Bishop  Brownell's  Prayer  Book,  360. 

"This rubric,  until  the  revision  of  1661,  provided  that  the  names 
should  he  given  in  over  nio;ht,  or  in  the  morning;  before  the  begin- 
ning of  Mornnig  Prayer,  or  else  immediately  after.  This  regula- 
tion shows  'hat  the  Communion  Office  was  distinct  from  the  Morn- 
ing Prayer,  and  that  an  interval  occurred  between  them  sufficiently 
long  to  allow  such  notice  to  be  given,  and  inquiries  to  be  instituted, 
as  were  necessary,  before  the  person  applying  could  be  admitted  to 
the  Lord's  Table. 


THE  lord's  supper.  133 

albe  plain,  with  a  vestment  or  cope.'-  Those  who  as- 
sisted the  officiating  Minister  were  required  to  wear 
albes  or  tunics.  This  rubric  also  contained  a  clause  to 
the  effect  that  the  Priest  should  say  the  Lord's  Prayer 
and  Collect  "standing  in  the  midst  of  the  altar.''''  The 
first  part  of  the  rubric  was  omitted  in  tlie  second  book 
of  Edward,  and  the  word  altar  chanired  into  table — a 
change  made  wherever  the  word  occurred  throughout 
the  service.'"  In  the  next  review  of  the  Liturgy  under 
Elizabeth,  the  old  rubrics  of  the  first  book  of  Edw^ard, 
with  regard  to  ornaments  and  vestments,  were  again 
brought  into  authority  by  the  first  rubric  before  the 
Order  for  Morning  Prayer,  which  is  as  follows:  "And 
here  is  to  be  noted  that  such  ornaments  of  the  Church 
and  of  the  Ministers  thereof,  at  all  times  of  their  min- 
istration, shall  be  retained  and  be  in  use,  as  were  in 
this  Church  of  England  by  the  authority  of  parliament 
in  the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Edward  VL" 
The  attempt  to  carry  out  this  rubric — which,  though 
never  revoked,  has  long  become  obsolete — has  caused 
much  dilficulty  and  discussion,  of  late,  in  the  English 
Church.  ]t  need  not  be  remarked  that,  as  we  have  nut 
retained  the  rubric,  we  have  no  authority  to  introduce 
the  garment>  wliich  it  specifies.  Indeed,  we  have  no 
law  upon  the  subject.  The  use  of  the  Bishop's  robes, 
and  of  surplices  and  gowns,  has  no  other  sanction  than 
that  of  custom;  and  if  this  be  a  sufficient  law  for  their 
Use,  it  is  a  law  equally  sufficient  to  limit  the  clergy  to 

'"  Dr.  Can]  well's  Two  Litui^ies  of  Edward  VI  compared,  p.  266. 


134  THE  lord's  supper. 

the  use   of  those  only,  and  of  those  in  the  mode  and 
place,  which  custom  has  prescribed." 

The  third  rubric  directs  that  the  table,  at  Communion 
time,  having  a  fair  linen  cloth  upon  it,  shall  stand  in 
the  body  of  the  church  or  chancel.  The  position  of 
the  Communion  Table  has  furnished  a  subject  for  much 
discussion;  but  it  is  sufficient  to  remark  here,  that  the 
usual  custom — in  this  country  the  universal — is  that  the 
table  stands  within  the  chancel.  The  Minister  is  directed 
to  perform  the  service  "standing  at  the  north  side  of 
the  table,  or  where  the  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer 


"  It  is  very  evident  that  the  old  rubric  of  Edward  was  reintro- 
duced to  gratify  tlie  dueen  ugainst  the  wishes  of  the  Reformers.  In 
a  paper  submitted  by  Guest,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Rochester,  and 
"one  who  lield  sentiments  on  doctrinal  matters  congenial  to  the 
dueen,"  but  "who  had  not  found  himself,  in  every  instance,  able 
to  comply  with  the  instructions  given  him  by  Cecil,  in  favor  of  the 
first  book  of  Edward — CardweWs  Conferences,  p.  21, — we  find  this 
emphatic  testimony  to  a  protestant  view  of  the  Sacrament: 

"Because  it  is  thought  sufficient  to  use  but  a  surplice  in  baptizing, 
reading,  preaching,  and  praying,  therefore  it  is  enough  also  in  cele- 
brating the  Communion.  For  if  we  should  use  another  garment 
herein,  it  should  seem  to  teach  us  that  higher  and  better  things  be 
given  by  it  than  be  given  by  the  other  service,  ivhich  we  must  not 
believe.  For  in  Baptism  we  put  on  Christ ;  and  in  the  Word  we 
eat  and  drink  Christ,  as  Hierom  and  Gregory  write.  And  Austin 
saith  the  Word  is  as  precious  as  this  Sacrament,  in  saying  "He 
sinneth  as  much  which  negligently  heareth  the  Word,  as  he  which 
willingly  letteth  Christ's  body  fall  to  the  ground.  And  Chrysostom 
saith,  He  that  is  not  fit  to  receive  is  not  fit  to  pray  ;  which  were 
not  true,  if  praying  were  not  of  as  much  importance  as  the  Com- 
munion.— CardiveWs  Conference,  pp.  50,  51. 


THE    lord's    supper.  135 

are  appointed  to  be  said."  The  rubric  directs  that  the 
Minister  shall  stand  at  the  north  side  of  the  table  which 
— as  the  churches  in  England  were,  after  the  ancient 
models,  so  constructed  as  that  the  table  was  at  the  east 
end — was  the  right  side  of  the  table.  As  our  churches 
are  not  uniformly  constructed  so  that  the  table  is  placed  - 
at  the  east,  custom  has  properly  determined  that  the 
Minister  shall  stand  at  the  right  side  of  the  table.  The 
expression  "or  where  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  are 
appointed  to  be  said,"  has  been  sometimes  supposed  to 
indicate  the  Lord's  Table  as  the  proper  place  for  the 
performance  of  that  service.  As  this  is  a  subject  which 
has  excited  some  discussion,  and  has  led  to  diversity  of 
practice,  it  is  somewhat  important  to  ascertain,  if  possi- 
ble, what  was  the  intention  of  our  Church.  We  may, 
perhaps,  best  ascertain  it  by  an  historical  analysis.'^ 

The  first  book  of  Edward  contained  a  rubric  at  the 
beginning  of  the  Morning  Prayer  which  directed  that 
"the  Priest,  being  in  the  quire,  should  begin  with  a 
loud  voice  the  Lord's  Prayer,  called  the  Pater  JVoster.^^^^ 
This  direction  seems  to  determine  the  Morning  Prayer, 
as  well  as  the  Communion  Service,  to  be  said  at  the 

"The  whole  subject  is  obscure.  Itsjobscurity  no  doubt  arises 
from  the  great  diversity  of  practice.  Cecil  complains  that  "Some 
say  the  service  in  the  chancel ;  others  in  the  body  of  the  church ; 
some  officiate  in  a  seat ;  some  in  the  pulpit,  with  their  faces  to  tlic 
people." — Collier  ii,  493. 

'■'And  yet  the  injunctions  issued  by  Edward  in  1547,  immediately 
on  his  accession,  enjoin  "that  the  church  wardens  at  the  common 
charge  of  the  parishioners  of  every  church  shall  provide  a  comely 
and  honest  pulpit,  to  he  set  in  a  convenient  place  within  the  same, 
for  the  preaching  of  God's  Word.'' — Liturgical  Tracts. 


136  THE  lord's  supper. 

Communion  Table.  It  was  changed  at  the  next  revision 
to  a  direction  that  "the  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer 
shall  be  used  in  such  place  of  the  church,  chapel,  or 
chancel,  and  the  Minister  shall  turn  him,  as  the  people 
best  may  hear.'"  All  controversy  which  might  arise 
was  to  be  referred  to  the  Ordinary.  Much  diversity  of 
practice  having  arisen  on  the  accession  of  Queen  Eliza- 
beiH,"  the  rubric  was  changed,  and  directed  that  "the 

'^  An  investigation  of  the  whole  subject  leads  us  to  the  following 
conclusion.  In  many  cases,  the  piactice  of  turning  their  backs  to 
the  people,  as  in  popish  times  was  continued.  The  Governors  of 
the  Church  set  forth  injunctions  intended  to  correct  the  practice, 
and  to  have  the  .service  read  in  a  desk  or  pew,  the  minister  having 
his  face  to  the  congregation.  In  some  cases  the  directions  were 
obeyed,  and  in  others  not.  This  accounts  for  two  opposite  repre- 
sentations, and  seeming  authorities  on  the  subject. 

On  the  one  hand  it  is  represented  by  the  Puritans,  in  the  way  of 
objection,  that  the  "Minister  sitteth  in  the  chancel  with  his  back 
to  the  people." — Cartwright  in  Hooker,  Keble  v,  30. 

On  the  other  hard  there  are  representations  to  the  effect  that  the 
service  is  performed  by  the  Minister  with  his  face  towards  tlie  peo- 
ple, and  niJiny  directions  and  iryunctions  like  the  following,  which 
enforce  the  practice  of  reading  the  service  in  a  pew  in  the  same  atti- 
tude. 

In  1569,  Parkhurst,  Bishop  of  Norwich,  orders  for  the  great 
churches  a  convenient  seat  in  the  body  of  the  church,  and  in  the 
smaller  churches  a  convenient  seat  outside  the  chancel's  door. — 
Hook''s  Church  Dictionary,  art.  Peiv. 

Archbishop  Griadal  gives  a  similar  direction,  {Remains,  123.) 
Scambler,  Bishoj)  of  Peterborough  directs  that  the  Common  Prayer, 
accustomed  to  be  said  in  the  choir  (according  to  the  first  direction 
of  Edward)  be  brought  down  into  the  body  of  the  church. — Strype 
Annals,  xi,  90.  The  4th  Canon  of  1604  directs  that  a  convenient 
seat  be  made  to  ftad  service  in. 

See,  also,  for  other  authoritiea  to  the  same  effectr-"How  shall 
we  conform  to  the  Liturgy,"  p.  68,  et  sequent. 


THE  lord's  supper.  137 

Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  should  be  used  in  the 
accustomed  place  oi  the  church,  chapel,  or  chancel.'""' 
This  rubric  is  somewhat  ambiguous,  though  probably  it 
refers  to  such  places  as  had  been  accustomed  luider  the 
direction  of  the  rubric,  which  provided  that  the  prayers 
should  so  be  read  as  that  the  people  best  might  hear. 
By  being  retained  after  Reading  Desks  were  established, 
not  only  by  practice,  but  by  order  of  Convocation,  in 
the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  King  James,  it  indicates 
clearly  the  Reading  Desk  or  Pew  as  the  accustomed 
place.  "^'     This  being  the  intention  of  the  lubric  before 

'*Wlieatly  reluctantly  admits,  thai  probably  by  the  uccustomed 
place,  "the  reading  desk  was  intended.  The  present  Bishop  of 
London*  speaks  as  follows  :  "I  do  not  think  it  to  be  the  intention  of 
our  Church,  that  the  officiating  Minister,  when  reading  prayer,  shSW 
turn  his  face  to  the  east,  with  his  back  to  the  congregation." 

'"This  interpretatioir  is  corroborated  Ijy  the  report  of  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  Committee  appointed  by  the  Hou.se  of  Lords,  touch- 
ing innovations  in  tlie  doctrine  and  discipline  of  the  Church  of 
England.  Upon  this  Committee  there  were  ten  Bishops,  among 
whom  were  Williams,  Moreton,  Montague,  and  Usher.  So  far  as 
they  recommend  changes,  they  may  be  entitled  to  no  more  deference 
than  tlirir  individual  intelligence  and  character  demand.  But  in 
their  testmiony  to  the  fact  of  what  were  mnovations,  they  are  cer- 
tainly entitled  to  full  credit.  Among  innovations  they  specify  the 
following : 

1.  The  turning  of  the  holy  table  altar-wise,  and  most  commonly 
calling  it  an  altar. 

2.  Bowing  towards  it  or  towards  the  east  many  times  with  three 
congees,  but  usualty  in  every  motion,  access  or  recess  in  the  church. 

3.  Advancing  Candlesticks  in  many  churches,  upon  the  altar  so 
called. 

4.  In  reading  some  part  of  the  Morning  Prayer,  at  the  Holy  Table, 
when  there  is  no  Communion  celebratetl-^CartlmH's  Cojt/innces^  872 


138  THE  lord's  supper. 

the  Morning  Prayer,  the  expression  in  this  rubric  before 
the  Communion  Office,  which  seems  to  have  reference 
to  the  old  practice  of  reading  in  the  choir,  is  admitted 
by  Whately'^  to  have  been  retained  through  inadvert- 
ence, and  is  spoken  of  by  Shepherd  as  that  which 
ought  to  have  been  expunged  "after  the  place  was 
transferred  from  the  Table  to  the  Reading  Desk.'""  It 
is  clearly  then  the  direction  of  the  Church  of  England, 
that  the  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  are  not  to  be  said 
at  the  Communion  Table,  but  in  the  Reading  Desk.'-^ 

Our  Church,  by  retaining  the  practice  of  the  Church 
of  England,  although  she  omitted  the  rubric  which  di- 
rected that  Morning  Prayer  should  be  said  in  the  accus- 
tomed place,  may  properly  be   supposed  to  occupy  the 

"  Whately,  p.  1 13.  '»  Brownell's  Prayer  Book,  3G2. 

'"'l"he  question  is  often  raised,  whetlier  extemporary  prayer  may 
lawfully  be  used  before  and  after  the  sermon.  The  custom  of  "bid- 
ding prayers"  in  the  English  Church  seems  to  ejive  a  sanction  to 
the  practice.  Neither  the  English  Church  nor  our  own  have  ever 
committed  itself,  by  authoritative  declaration  or  legislation  on  the 
subject,  against  the  practice.  In  the  first  Convocation  of  Charles 
II,  as  we  learn  from  Kennett  Regi-ster,  p.  576 :  "In  one  of  the  same 
sessions  (the  40th)  the  Bishops  came  unanimously  to  a  vote  in 
favor  of  some  constant  forms  of  prayer  to  be  used  before  and  after 
sermons.  By  so  doing,  they  were  extinguishing  the  last,  and  per- 
haps the  most  earnest,  hope  of  the  Non-Conformists  for  an  oppor- 
tunity of  exercising  what  they  styled  the  gift  of  prayer.  For  pru- 
dential reasons,  however,  </ie  Bishops  did  not  carry  their  resolulion  inlo 
effect. — CardiveWs  Conferences,  p.  371. 

From  a  letter  to  Archbishop  TillotsoH,  (Cardwell's  Conferences, 
p.  454,)  "the  liberty  taken  in  the  prayer  before  sermons,  and  a 
short  prayer  of  the  Minister's  own  composing  after  sermon,"  ar6 
gpolcQj)  qfas  pi'scticee  v/hjcli  '^%ve  sj''^^!)  cu^tqri]£jfy." 


THE  lord's  supper.  139 

same  position,  in  regard  to  this  subject,  witii  the  Church 
of  England.  Certain  it  is,  that  when  she  adopted  the 
Liturgy,  her  practice,  in  this  respect,  corresponded  to 
that  of  the  English  Church.  Morning  and  Evening 
Prayer  were  performed  in  the  Reading  Desk,  within  or 
without  the  chancel,  so  that  the  people  best  might  hear, 
and  only  the  Communion  Office  was  read  at  the  Com- 
munion Table.  It  is  manifestly  proper  that,  in  all  cases, 
the  Ante-Communion  Service  should  be  read  at  the 
Lord's  Table.  -" 

The  services  commence  with  the  Lord's  Prayer  and 
the  Collect  for  purity.  The  Ten  Commandments,  which 
are  found  in  no  ancient  or  modern  Liturgy,  are  with 
great  propriety  placed  in  the    forefront  of  a  Sacrament 

■-'"Tlie  postures  proper  to  be  observed  during  the  administration 
of  the  Lord's  Supper,  were  thus  specified  l)y  the  House  of  Bishops 
in  J 33:2,  at  tlie  request  of  tlie  House  of  Clerical  and  Lay  Deputies. 

Kiiftlin'^  during  the  wiiole  of  the  Ante-Couununion,  except  the 
Epistle,  which  is  to  be  hoard  in  the  usual  posture  for  hearing  the 
Scriptures,  and  the  Gospel  which  is  to  be  heard  standing. 

The  sentences  of  the  Offertory  are  to  be  heard  sitting,  as  the  most 
favorable  posture  fjr  handing  alms,  &c.,  to  the  person  collecting. 

Kneeling,  to  be  observed  during  the  prayer  for  the  Church  mili- 
tant. 

Standi-<>g,  during  the  Exhortations. 

Kneeling  to  be  then  resumed,  and  continued  until  after  the  prayer 
of  Consecration. 

islanding,  at  the  singing  of  the  hymn. 

Kneduig,  when  receiving  the  elements,  and  during  the  posl- 
coiiimunion,  or  that  part  of  the  service  which  succeeds  the  deliver- 
ing or  receiving  of  the  elements,  except  the  Gloria  in  Excelsis, 
wliich  is  to  be  said  or  sung  standing.  After  which  the  congregation 
?)iQu)4  a^ajn  Ifiml  tQ  recpjyp  fh?  (>NRit)g:. 


140  THE    lord's    supper. 

in  which  we  renew  our  consecration  to  God,  and  pro- 
fess to  repent  of  all  past  violations  of  His  laws,  and  take 
u])on  ourselves  new  vows  to  have  respect  to  all  His 
commandments.  Then  follovy  the  Collect,  Epistle,  and 
Gospel  for  the  day;  after  which,  notices  of  the  holy 
days  that  are  to  be  observed,  and  of  the  Communion, 
are  to  be  given.  Then  succeeds  the  sermon,  after 
which,  when  there  is  a  Communion,  the  Offertory  is  to 
be  .said. "'  We  need  not  detain  the  reader  with  details 
upon  these  obviously  appropriate  portions  of  the  service. 

*'  As  the  practice  of  using  the  OflFertory  weekly  has  been  resumed 
in  some  portions  of  our  Church,  we  give  the  following  extract  from 
a  Letter  of  Bishop  Hopkins,  of  Vermont,  which  shows  how  unau- 
thorized the  custom  is  in  our  Church: 

"  It  is  notorious  that  this  order  of  the  Offertory,  which  made  it 
a  constant  part  of  the  JJnte- Communion  Service,  went  out  of  use  by 
very  general  consent  in  England,  long  before  the  period  of  tlie 
American  Revolution  ;  so  that  the  almost  universal  practice  was 
to  close  the  service  with  a  collect  and  the  Apostolical  benediction 
immediately  after  the  morning  sermon,  even  on  Communion  days  ; 
and  tlien  allow  the  non-communicants  to  depart,  before  proceed- 
ing to  the  Offertory  :  while  on  other  days  the  whole  congregation 
were  dismissed  at  the  same  time,  with  the  larger  benediction  of 
the  Communion  Service,  precisely  as  our  own  mode  was  after- 
wards fixed,  and  as,  with  very  few  and  recent  exceptions,  it  still 
continues.  How  far  this  change  of  practice  ought  to  influence  the 
present  judgment  of  the  Prelates  of  our  mother  Church,  is  a  mat- 
ter for  them  and  not  for  me  to  consider.  But  I  adverted  to  the  fact 
in  order  to  account  for  the  striking  difference,  which  the  fathers  of 
our  American  Church  established  in  our  rubrics,  by  conforming 
them  to  the  then  prevailing  custom  of  the  Church,  instead  of  copying 
them  from  the  English  Prayer-Book. 

'^Tlie  disjiiijction  thus  6o.o8i'm§4  WfH  be  pepfeatly  ftpparenf.  srt  # 


THE    lord's    supper.  I4l 

The  prayer  for  the  whole  state  of  Christ's  Church  mili- 
tant here  on  earth,  was,  in  the  first  Liturgy,  merely 
called  the  prayer  for  the  whole  state  of  Christ's  Church, 
and  contained  a  commemoration  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
and   prayer   for  the   dead.     At  the    next  revision  the 


comparison  of  the  English  rubric   with  our  own,  which  is  as  fol- 
lows : 

"  '1  Then  shall  follow  the  sermon  ;  after  which  the  Minister,  when  there 
IS  A  CoMMiiNioN,  shall  return  to  the  Lord's  Table,  and  begin  the  Oflertary, 
saying  one  or  more  of  these  sentences  following,' &.e. 

"  Here  we  perceive  that  the  words  '  when  there  is  a  Commu- 
nion,' which,  in  tlie  Enghsh  Liturgy,  are  placed  after,  in  our  Litur- 
gy are  placed  before  the  Otferlory.  From  which  it  is  obvious  that 
our  rubric  authorizes  the  Offertory  only  when  there  is  a  Communion  ; 
whereas,  the  English  rubric  orders  it  in  all  cases  where  there  is  a 
sermon  fullowing  the  ^nte- Communion  Service.  Hence  the  famil- 
iar practice  of  ail  our  regular  Churches  to  dismiss  the  non-com- 
municants with  a  collect  and  the  benediction  after  the  sermon,  was 
thenceforth  in  agreement  with  our  rubric,  because  the  Offertory 
was  now  fixed  as  a  part  of  the  ordinary  public  administration  of 
the  Sacrament,  and  the  placing  of  tlie  alms  and  other  devotions  of 
the  people  upon  the  holy  table,  was  connected  with  the  prayer  for 
Christ's  Church  militant,  as  being  offered  by  those  only  tvho  re- 
mained for  the  purpose  of  communion.  Consequently,  while  the 
Bishops  of  the  mother  Church  do  indeed  innovate  upon  the  pre- 
vailing custom  amongst  their  own  parishes,  by  ordering  the  Offer- 
tory to  be  used  every  Sunday  and  holy  day,  whether  there  be  a 
communion  or  not,  yet  they  can  fairly  allege  their  rubric  in  justifica- 
tion. Whereas,  we  cannot  authorize  such  a  course  without  directly 
contravening  our  rubric,  which  agrees  with  the  usage  of  the  Church 
in  England, and  which  our  venerated  fathers  arranged  in  its  present 
form,  for  the  very  purpose  of  making  the  written  lau'  harmonize 
with  the  general  custom.''^ 


142  THE  LOftD-S  nvppm, 

commemoration  of  the  Virgin  and  the  prayer  for  "the 
dead  were  omitted,  and  the  words,  "  militant  here  on 
earth,"  were  added  to  the  title;  changes  expressive  of  a 
final  emancipation  of  the  framers  of  the  Liturgy  from 
some  of  the  last  and  clinging  errors  and  superstitions  in 
which  they  were  trained.  In  no  part  of  our  services 
could  this  prayer  be  more  appropriately  introduced. 
The  Exhortation  which  follows,  and  is  to  be  read  on  the 
Sunday  or  holy  day  immediately  preceding  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  Holy  Communion,  and  that  which  is  to  be 
used  "if  the  Minister  shall  see  the  people  negligent  to 
come,"  are  amongst  the  most  perfect  specimens  of  faith- 
ful, affectionate,  and  Scriptural  preaching,  anywhere  to 
be  found.  At  the  time  of  the  celebration  of  the  Holy 
Communion  there  follows  another  Exhortation,  to  come 
to  the  feast  with  self-examination,  penitence,  faith, 
charity,  and  thanksgiving.  It  is  such  an  exhortation  as 
he  who  is  about,  with  the  people,  by  the  lifting  up  of 
his  heart  with  theirs,  to  enter  into  the  very  presence  of 
Christ,  may  well  address  to  them.  It  will  be  observed, 
that  this  Exhortation  is  addressed  to  those  who  are 
about  to  receive  the  Communion,  while  the  other  two 
are  directed  to  the  whole  congregation.  Originally  (in 
the  first  Liturgy)  the  Exhortation  wliich  stands  first  in 
our  present  service  was  placed  second,  and  the  rubric 
directed  that  it  should  also  "  some  time  be  said  at  the 
discretion  of  the  Curate;"  while  that  which  now  stands 
second  was  first,  and  was  directed  to  be  read  (not  on 
the  Sunday  previous,  but  on  the  same  Sunday,  when 
the  Communion  was  administered)  at  certain  times 
when  the  Curate  saw  the  people  negligent  to  come  to 


THE   LofiC-S  StJpPBlt.  143 

the  Holy  Communion.  The  changes  were  made  at  the 
last  revision  of  the  Liturgy,  in  1662,  at  the  suggestion 
of  the  Presbyterian  divines.  There  are  several  changes 
and  omissions  in  these  Exhortations  significant  of  the 
advance  made  in  purity  of  doctrine  from  the  first  Litur- 
gy of  Edward,  to  which  the  reader's  attention  hereafter 
will  be  called. 

All  things  being  now  ready,  the  communicants  are 
invited  to  draw  near  and  take  the  Holy  Sacrament  to 
their  comfort,  confessing,  and  listening  to  the  })roclama- 
tion  of  pardon  for,  their  sins.  Then  follow  four  senten- 
ces from  Scripture,  admirably  calculated  to  cheer  and 
elevate  the  heart.  Then  the  versicles,  so  suitable  to  an 
eucharistic  service,  "  Lift  up  your  heart,"  &.c.,  to- 
gether with  the  trisagion,  prepare  us  for  the  blessed 
feast  which  the  Apostles  kept  with  "  gladness  and  sin- 
gleness of  heart,  praising  God."  This  delightful  part  of 
the  service  is  found  in  all  the  ancient  liturgies  of  the 
Church,  and  usually  is  the  commencement  of  the  ser- 
vice. The  trisagion,  or  hymn  of  the  angels,  was  al- 
most universally  connected  with  a  long  eucharistic 
enumeration  of  the  glories  of  God  and  his  blessings  to 
mankind.  After  the  example  of  the  ancient  liturgies, 
this  portion  of  the  service  in  the  first  book  of  Edward, 
commenced  immediately  after  the  Offertory,  and  before 
the  prayer  for  the  Church  militant.  A  prayer  is  said 
by  the  Priest  in  the  name  of  all  the  people,  inunediately 
before  the  consecration.  Then  the  Priest,  standing 
before  the  table,  repeats  the  prayer  of  consecration. 
The  elements  are  consecrated  as  the  memorials  of  the 
Saviour's   body  and   blood,   by    the    whole    prayer,    in 


l44  THE    LORD^S    SUPPER. 

which  are  included,  historically,  the  words  of  the  Sa- 
viour at  the  institution  of  the  Sacrament.  In  the  Eng- 
lish Liturgy,  the  prayer  of  consecration  closes  with  the 
words  of  the  Saviour,  "  Do  this,  as  oft  as  ye  shall  drink 
it,  in  remembrance  of  me."  One  of  the  petitions,  how- 
ever, contained  in  our  invocation,  are  included  in  it; 
namely,  "  Grant  that  we,  receiving  these  thy  creatures 
of  bread  and  wine,  according  to  thy  Son  our  Saviour 
Jrsus  Christ's  holy  institution,  in  remembrance  of  his 
death  and  passion,  may  be  partakers  of  his  most  blessed 
body  and  blood."  The  Oblation  and  Invocation  were 
restored  to  our  service,  from  the  first  Liturgy  of  Edward, 
by  our  General  Convention,  in  1789.  It  was  omitted  in 
the  second  book  of  King  Edward  at  the  instance  of  Bu- 
cer  and  Martyr,  and  has  never  been  restored  in  the 
English  office.  There  is  great  beauty  and  propriety  in 
connecting  these  ancient  prayers  wjth  the  eucharistic 
service.  They  contain  a  formal  and  solemn  offering  up 
of  ourselves  and  our  services  to  God,  and  a  fervent  sup- 
plication that  God  would  bless  the  consecrated  elements 
to  us,  and  us  in  the  reception  of  them,  that  we  may  ob- 
tain all  the  benefits  of  his  passion.  What  more  proper 
than  that,  when  we  are  receiving  one  of  God's  greatest 
blessings,  we  should  offer  up  our  most  solemn  sacrifices 
of  praise  and  thanksgiving,  and  renew  the  consecration 
of  ourselves  to  his  service  ? 

After  the  singing  of  a  hymn,  a  regulation  not  found  in 
the  English  Church,  the  Priest  receives  the  Communion 
in  both  kinds  himself,  and  proceeds  to  deliver  to  the 
Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  (if  any  be  present,)  and 
then  to  the  people.     The  elements  are  received  by  all 


THE  lord's  supper.  145 

devoutly  kneeling.  '-  In  the  first  service  of  Edward, 
only  the  first  clauses  of  the  sentences  "  the  body,"  &c., 
"  and  the  blood,"  &c.,  were  repeated  at  the  institution 
of  the  elements.  At  the  first  interview  under  Edward, 
that  part  was  altogether  omitted,  and  the  portion  which 
forms  the  second  clause  in  each  of  the  sentences  was 
introduced.  At  the  review  under  Elizabeth,  both 
clauses  were  united  as  they  are  at  present.  The 
omission  of  the  expressions,  "the  body  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  which  was  given  for  thee,  preserve  thy 
body  and  soul  to  everlasting  life,"  and  ''the  blood  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  which  was  shed  for  thee,"  &c., 
probably  arose  from  the  anxiety,  which  we  trace  in  all 
their  changes,  to  omit  any  thing  which  might  appear  to 
favor  the  doctrine  of  the  real  presence.  The  introduc- 
tion of  the  other  clauses,  in  which  the  single  idea  of  a 
memorial  is  found,  shows  what  view  of  the  Sacrament 
was  held  by  the  Reformers.  The  re-union  of  the  two 
by  Elizabeth  was  made  for  the  double  purpose — one  of 
which  marked  all  her  reign — of  conciliating  the  Papists, 
and  of  guarding  against  low  and  radical  views  of  the 
Sacrament,  which  were,  or  were  supposed  to  be,  held 
by  some  Protestants  on  the  continent. 

After  all  have  communicated,  then  the  Minister  with 
the  people  repeats  the  Lord's  Prayer;  then  he  offers  a 
thanksgiving  for  the  blessings  connected  with  the  Lord's 

**  A  sufficient  defence  of  this  custom,  if  it  need  any,  is  found  in 
these  words  of  good  Bishop  Wilson:  "No  posture  can  be  too 
humble  when  we  receive  a  pardon — and  a  pardon  which  must 
deliver  us  from  death  eternal. " 

Bishop  Brownell's  Prayer-Book,  p-  388. 

7 


146  tHE   lord's   SUPPEtt. 

Supper.  Then  follows,  by  all  standing,  the  Gloria  in 
Excelsis,  and  the  Benediction.  The  Collects  at  the  close 
of  the  service  are  such  as  may  be  said  after  the  Collects 
at  Morning  and  Evening  prayer,  or  at  the  Communion, 
at  the  discretion  of  the  Minister. 

Such  is  a  brief  description  of  the  Communion  Office 
of  our  church;  a  service  which,  for  holy  beauty,  devo- 
tional fervor,  and  Scriptural  purity  of  doctrine,  has, 
probably,  no  equal  in  ancient  or  modern  days.  The 
dignity  of  the  Sacramertt,  and  the  importance  of  right 
views  upon  it,  will  render  no  excuse  necessary  for 
making  it  the  subject  of  somewhat  protracted  consider- 
ation. 

The  nature  and  office  of  this  Sacrament  being  con- 
tained in  a  few  passages  of  the  Bible,  it  would  seem  not 
difficult  to  ascertain.  Let  us,  for  a  moment,  forget  that 
there  has  ever  been  any  controversy  on  the  subject,  and 
turn  to  the  holy  record  to  ascertain  what  it  teaches  in 
regard  to  this  Sacrament. 

There  are  three  separate  accounts  given  of  its  institu- 
tion by  St.  Matthew,  St.  Mark,  and  St.  Luke,  besides 
the  olie  given  by  St.  Paul.  The  following  is  the  account 
of  its  institution  as  given  by  St.  Matthew  :'^ 

"Now,  when  the  even  was  come,  he  sat  down  with  the 
twelve,"  &c.  (v.  20.)  "And  as  they  were  eating,  Jesus 
took  bread  and  blessed  it,  and  brake  it,  and  gave  it  to 
his  disciples,  and  said.  Take,  eat;  this  is  my  body.  And 
he  took  the  cup  and  gave  thanks,  and  gave  it  to  thein, 
saying,  Drink  ye  all  of  it;  for  this   is  my  blood  of  the 


«3  Matthew  xxvi,  20,  26,  30. 


THE  lord's  supper.  147 

New  Testament  which  is  shed  for  many  for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins.  But  I  say  unto  you,  I  will  not  drink  hence- 
forth of  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  until  that  day  when  f  drink 
it  new  with  you  in  my  Father's  kingdom." 

Now,  let  us  observe  what  is  included  in  this  account. 

1.  Bread  and  wine  constitute  the  matter  of  the  Sacra- 
ment; the  one  broken  and  given  to  the  disciples  to  be 
eaten;  the  other  presented  to  them  to  be  drunken. 

2.  The  blessing  at  the  taking  of  bread,  and  the  giving 
of  thanks  at  the  taking  of  the  cup. 

3.  The  declaration,  by  the  Saviour,  that  bread  was 
his  body  and  the  cup  his  blood  of  the  New  Testament, 
which  was  shed  for  many  for  the  remission  of  sins. 

4.  The  cup  is  the  blood  of  the  New  Testament  or 
Covenant;  that  is,  the  seal  of  the  New  Covenant  for  the 
remission  of  sins  through  the  blood  of  the  Redeemer;  a 
seal  which  God  affixes  to  his  covenant,  and  to  which 
we  anew  subscribe  our  faithful  adherence  as  oft  as  we 
drink  it. 

5.  A  declaration,  (which  forms  no  part  of  the  institu- 
tion,) that  he  would  not  drink  of  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  &.c. 

In  explanation  of  the  second  point,  it  is  to  be  observed, 
that  whereas,  in  the  English  version,  the  reading  is, 
"he  took  bread  and  blessed  ?7,"  in  the  original  the  word 
it  is  not.  expressed,  and,  by  the  learned  Greisbach,  the 
word  Gorf  is  supplied.  The  meaning  of  the  expression, 
then,  would  be,  that  he  blessed  God.  When  the  Sa- 
viour declared  the  bread  to  be  his  body  and  the  cup  his 
blood,  were  his  words  to  be  literally  taken?  Is  the 
whole  account  literal?  Clearly  not.  He  calls  the  wine 
the  cup      Here  is  one  figure.     Again,  he  calls  the  cup 


148  THE  lord's  supper, 

which  stands  for  the  wine,  the  fndt  of  the  vine,  after  he 
had  declared  it  to  be  his  blood  of  the  New  Testament. 
Here  is  a  second  figure.  If  the  cup  or  wine  was  not 
literally  his  blood,  after  he  had  called  it  so,  we  conclude 
that  the  bread  was  not  literally  his  body,  after  he  had 
called  it  so.  If  not  literally  and  really  so,  then  the}'- 
must  have  been  so  symbolically;  if  not  his  body  and 
blood,  then  they  represented  them.  With  this — its  own 
explanation  of  its  own  meaning — the  passage  conveys 
these  points,  included  in  the  institution  of  the  Sacra- 
ment by  Christ,  as  there  recorded: 

1.  Bread  and  wine,  the  elements  or  matter  of  the 
Sacrament;  the  one  to  be  broken  and  given  to  the  dis- 
ciples, to  be  eaten;  the  other  to  be  presented  to  them, 
that  they  might  drink  it. 

2.  Blessing  and  thanksgiving  to  (iod  before  present- 
ing the  bread  and  wine. 

3.  The  bread  and  wine,  the  symbols  which  repre- 
sented the  body  and  blood  of  Christ. 

4.  The  cup,  the  seal  of  the  New  Covenant  for  the 
remission  of  sins  through  the  blood  of  the  Redeemer;  a 
seal  which  God  affixes  to  his  covenant,  and  to  which 
we  anew  subscribe  our  faithful  adherence  as  oft  as  we 
drink  it. 

The  following  is  the  account  of  the  same  scene,  given 
by  St.  Mark : 

"And  as  they  did  eat,  Jesus  took  bread,  and  blessed, 
and  brake  it,  and  gave  to  them,  and  said.  Take,  eat; 
this  is  my  body.  And  he  took  the  cup,  and  when  he 
had  given  thanks,  he  gave  it  to  them;  and  they  all  drank 
of  it.     And  he  said  unto  them,  This  is  my  blood  of  the 


i 


THE  lord's  supper.  .  149 

New  Testament  which  i.s  .shed  lor  many.  Verily  1  say 
unto  you,  I  will  drink  no  more  of  the  fruit  of  the  vine 
until  that  day  that  I  drink  it  new  in  the  kingdom  of 
God."-^ 

The  same  points  are  included  in  this  narrative  as  in 
that  of  St.  Matthew. 

The  more  brief  account  of  St.  Luke  is  as  follows: 

"And  he  took  bread,  and  gave  thanks,  and  brake  it, 
and  gave  unto  them,  saying,  "This  is  my  body  which 
was  given  for  you;  this  do  in  remembrance  of  me.  Like- 
wise, also,  the  cup,  after  supper,  saying.  This  cup  is 
the  New  Testament  in  my  blood,  which  is  shed  for 
you."'" 

Here  there  is  nothing  contraveryng  those  points  al- 
ready developed;  w  hile  two  of  them  are  not  brought  out 
with  the  same  fulness  as  they  are  in  the  records  of  St. 
Matthew  and  St.  Mark.  For  instance,  while  it  is 
recorded  that  he  gave  thanks,  the  mention  of  blessing 
is  omitted;  while,  as  above,  he  calls  the  bread  his  body, 
he  calls  the  cup  "the  New  Testament  or  Covenant  in 
his  blood;"  language  so  manifestly  figurative  as  to  fix 
upon  the  words  a  symbolical  meaning,  as  evidently  as 
the  expressions  in  the  other  Evangelists,  which  desig- 
nate the  blood,  so  called,  as  "the  fruit  of  the  vine."  But 
a  new  point  is  brought  out  in  this  brief  record  of  St. 
Luke,  in  the  words,  "do  this  in  remembrance  of  me." 
Here  the  Saviour  declares  that  the  object  of  these  rep- 
resentations of  his  body  and  blood  is,  that  they  may 
serve  for  a  memorial  of  him. 

S''  Mark  xiv,  22,  25. 
2*Lukexxii,  19,20. 


150  THE  lord's  supper. 

We  now  turn  to  the  record  of  St.  Paul,  contained  in 
the  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthiaris :  "For  I  have  re- 
ceived of  the  Lord  that  which  also  I  delivered  unto  you, 
that  the  Lord  Jesus,  the  same  night  he  was  betrayed, 
took  bread,  and  when  he  had  given  thanks,  he  brake 
it,  saying.  Take,  eat;  this  is  my  body,  which  is  broken  for 
you;  this  do  in  remembrance  of  me.  After  the  same 
manner,  also,  he  took  the  cup  when  he  had  supped, 
saying.  This  cup  is  the  New  Testament  in  my  blood;  this 
do  ye,  as  oft  as  ye  drink  it,  in  remembrance  of  me.  For 
as  often  as  ye  eat  this  bread  and  drink  this  cup  ye  do  shew 
the  Lord's  death  till  he  corne.  Wherefore,  whosoever 
shall  eat  this  bread  and  drink  this  cup  of  the  Lord  un- 
worthily, shall  be  guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Lord.  But  let  a  man  examine  himself,  and  so  let  him 
eat  of  that  bread  and  drink  of  that  cup.  For  he  that 
eateth  and  drinketh  unworthily,  eateth  and  drinketh 
damnation  to  himself,  not  discerning  the  Lord's  body.  '^'^ 

This  passage  contains  essentially  all  the  points  hitherto 
developed.  We  have,  1,  the  bread  and  wine;  2,  the 
blessing  at  the  taking  of  the  bread,  and  also  of  the  wine, 
for  "he  took  the  cup  after  the  same  manner;"  3,  the 
bread  called  the  body,  and  the  cup  the  blood,  because 
they  represented  them,  as  is  manifest  from  the  fact,  that 
they  were  called  bread  and  the  cup  by  the  Safiour, 
after  they  were  spoken  of  by  hijn  as  his  body  and  blood. 
In  this  account,  also,  we  have  the  idea  fully  developed 
which  may  be  involved,  but  is  not  expressed,  in  the 
Evangelists  St.  Matthew  and  St.   Mark,  and  is  more 


26  1Cor.xi,  23-30. 


THE    lord's    supper.  151 

briefly  indicated  in  connexion  with  the  bread  in  St. 
Luke.  The  bread  and  wine  which  represent  the  body 
broken  and  the  blood  shed,  are  to  be  memorials  of  the 
Saviour's  death.  When  Christ  presents  the  bread  and 
the  wine  to  his  disciples,  he  says,  "This  do,"  and 
"This  do  ye,  as  oft  as  ye  drink  it,  in  remembrance  of 
me.  For  as  oft  as  ye  eat  this  bread,  and  drink  this 
cup,  ye  do  show  the  Lord's  death  till  he  come."  The 
bread  and  wine  are  to  be  memorials  of  the  Saviour's 
death. 

Besides  these  points,  there  are  others  also  brought 
out  in  this  passage  of  St.  Paul.  1.  The  Lord's  Supper 
is  to  be  a  perpetual  institution;  the  Lord's  death  being 
showed  in  it  till  he  come.  2.  The  unworthy  partaker 
is  declared  to  be  guilty  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ, 
and  to  eat  to  his  condemnation  or  judgment,  because  he 
does  not  discern  the  Lord's  body;  that  is,  because  he 
discovers  nothing  more  in,  and  is  no  more  benefitted  by,, 
this  Supper,  than  by  a  common  meal.  3.  The  duty  of 
examining  himself  before  eating  that  bread  and  drinking 
that  cup,  so  that  in  them  (bread  and  cup  still)  he  might 
discern  the  Lord'>  body.  4.  Thi^  commemorative  ser- 
vice will  be  a  perpetual  showing  forth  to  the  world  in 
a  manner,  striking  and  significant,  the  death  of  the  Lord 
until  he  come  again.  In  the  language  of  Dr.  Stone, 
"  It  carries  with  it  the  evidence  of  a  moral  monument 
to  the  truth  and  divine  origin  of  T-hristianity,  and  to  the 
identity  of  the  Church  throughout  all  ages." 

Another  passage  in  St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians refers  to  the  same  blessed  institution.  "  The  cup 
of  blessing  which  we  bless,  is  it  not  the  comrauniou  of 


iZ  THE    LORD  8    SUPPER. 

e  bloud  ol  Christ  ?  The  bread  which  we  break,  is  it 
)t  the  communion  of  the  body  ol"  Christ  ?  For  we  being 
any  are  one  bread  and  one  body;  for  we  are  all  par- 
kers  of  that  one  bread."*'  The  word  here  translated 
mmunion,  is  everywhere  else  in  the  New  Testament 
ndered  by  the  word  ftllrmiship,  ox  participation^  ^  and 
metimes  by  the  terms  distribution '"'  or  cui}tribution.  " 
\\e  idea  thus  expressed  by  it  is  that  of  fellowship  or 
irticipation,  and  that  usually  in  the  sense  of  receiving 
'nefits.  Taken  in  connection  with  the  verse  that  fol- 
\vs,  the  translation  of  Macknight,  who  renders  it  the 
iut  partiripiition,  is,  perhaps,  the  most  accurate  that 
luld  be  given  to  the  word.  The  meaning  of  the  pas- 
ge,  then,  is,  that  in  the  reception  of  this  bread  and 
ine,  which  are  the  memorials  of  the  Saviour's  death, 
p  jointly  partake  or  have  fellowship  in  the  body  and 
ood  of  Christ;  that  is,  we  are  partakers  of  (he  benefits 
his  death.  "     The    passage  also  involves  the  idea, 

"  1  Cor.  X,  16,  17.         »'  1  Cor.  i,  9;  2  Cor.  vi.  14;  Acts  ii,  42. 
»  2  Cor.  ix,  13.  *' Romans  xv,  26. 

"  Thai  this  is  tlie  srnsc  of  ihc  passngr  may  Ik"  nia<lr  yfit  more 
idcul.  If  it  IS  not  to  be  understood  us  a  c/)inniuinori  «>r  pariiri- 
tion  of  the  benefits  of  Christ's  death,  then  it  exprrmes  the  idea 
it  we  receive  and  partake  of  his  real  body  and  blood, — hm 
man  flesh.  This  cannot  be,  for  thai  which  is  called  the  com- 
inion  or  fellowship  of  his  bo<ly  and  blood  is  called  the  "  bread 
lich  we  break,"  and  "  tiie  cup  of  blessin?  which  we  bless."  And 
It  this  is  the  name  given  to  the  elements  after  they  are  blessed, 
rlear  from  the  17th  verse,  which  declares  that  "  we  are  all  par- 
trs  of  that  otu  bread;"  bread,  the  right  reception  of  which  is 
:  communion  of  the  body  of  Christ,  that  is,  of  the  benefits  which 
:rue  to  ua  by  his  crucified  body.     The  21  si  verse  confirms  this 


THE  lord's  supper.  153 

that  in  addition  to  the  giving  of  thanks,  and  the  blessing 
rendered  to  God,  the  cup,  and,  therefore,  probably  the 
bread,  is  to  be  blessed.  That  which  is  set  apart  to  a 
sacred  use  is,  in  Scripture,  thereby  said  to  be  blessed.  ^^ 
The  fellowship  and  union  of  the  partakers  of  the  bene- 
fits of  Christ'.s  death  with  Christ,  and  their  fellowship 
with  each  other,  arising  from  their  fellowship  with  him, 
is  another  idea  contained  in  this  passage. 


interpretation.     "  Ye  cannot  drink  the  cup  of  the  Lord  and  the  cup 

of  devils;  ye  cannot  be  pnitakers  of  the  Lord's  Tabic  and  of  the 
table  of  devils."  [f  they  who  [)artook  of  the  Lord's  Table,  literally 
and  actually  partook  of  his  human  flesh  and  blood,  then  they  who 
sat  at  idol  feasts,  in  partaking  of  the  food  sacrificed  to  idols,  must 
be  supposed  actually  to  have  eaten  the  substance  of  the  demons  to 
whom  the  feasts  were  consecrated.  Such  absurdities  of  Scripture 
interpretation  does  the  idea,  that  we  partake  of  the  literal  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  compel  us  to  adopt ! 

The  idea  that  the  communion  or  fellowship  of  a  thing  involves 
the  literal  reception  of  the  real  and  identical  thing  itself  with 
which  there  is  communion,  would  lead  to  strange  interpretations  of 
various  portions  of  God's  Word.  Take,  for  instance,  Philippians 
iii,  10,  and  1  Peter  iv,  13,  in  which  the  word  here  rendered  com- 
munion occurs:  "That  I  may  know  him  and  the  power  of  his  re- 
surrection and  the  ftlloirskip  of  his  siij^erings.^''  "  The  fellowship  of 
his  sufferings,"  on  tlie  principle  above  mentioned,  would  be  com- 
pelled to  take  the  im()ossible  meaning  that  we  might  experience 
Christ's  own  identical  agonies  in  the  garden  and  on  the  cross. 
And  so  with  the  passage  in  St.  Peter.  When  that  Apostle  bids  us 
rejoice  that  we  are  made  partakers  of  Christ's  sufferings,  our  rejoic- 
ing is  not  to  be  that  we  are  permitted  to  suffer  like  him  and  with 
him,  and  tt)  be  partaker.*!  of  the  benefits  of  his  sufferings,  but  we 
ourselves  are  to  lose  our  identity  and  be  clothed  with  his,  and  under- 
go his  personal  agonies ! 

3«Gen.  ii,  3;  Ex.  xx,  11. 

7* 


154  THE   LORD*S    SUPPER. 

The  other  notices  of  this  Sacrament,  in  the  Word  of 
God,  are  merely  incidental,  and  contain  no  new  points 
as  constituting  part  of  its  nature  and  design.  '* 

Now,  let  us  gather  together  all  the  circumstances 
connected  with  the  institution  of  this  Sacrament,  and 
we  shall  be  able  to  see  what  a  Scriptural  service,  in 
■which  this  Sacrament  is  celebrated,  should  contain: 

1.  The  bread  and  wine  are  the  elements  or  matter  of 
the  Sacrament;  the  one  to  be  broken  and  given  to  the 
disciples  to  be  eaten:  the  other  to  be  presented  to  them 
that  they  may  drink  it. 

2.  Blessing  God  and  giving  him  thanks,  are  to  pre- 
cede the  distribution  of  bread  and  wine, 

3.  Blessing  the  cup,  and,  therefore,  probably  the 
bread,  by  the  solemn  setting  of  them  apart  for  the  holy 
use  of  the  Sacrament,  is  also  to  precede  their  distribu- 
tion. 

4.  The  bread  and  wine  are  to  be  employed  as  the 
representatives  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ. 

5.  The  object  of  such  representatives  or  symbols  is 
to  present  a  perpetual  memorial  or  remembrance  of  the 
Saviour's  death  until  his  coming  again. 

6.  It  is  a  seal  of  the  New  Covenant  for  the  remission 
of  sins  made  through  the  blood  of  the  Redeemer;  a  seal 
which  God  affixes  to  his  Covenant,  and  to  which  we 
anew  subscribe  our  faithful  adherence  as  often  as  we 
commemorate  the  Saviour's  death  in  this  memorial. 

^*  Those  who  may  suppose  that  the  sixth  chapter  of  St.  John 
has  reference  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  we  refer  to  Dr.  Stone's  mas- 
terly analysis  of  that  chapter,  in  his  "  Mysteries  Opened,"  and  to 
Dr.  Turner's  learned  exegetical  Essay  on  our  Lord's  Discourse  at 
Capernaum. 


THE  lord's  supper.  155 

7.  This  Supper  of  the  Lord,  thus  instituted,  is  also  a 
sign  and  seal  of  the  love  which  Christians  ought  to  have 
among  themselves  one  to  another,  as  well  as  a  memorial 
of  the  Saviour's  death. 

8.  This  commemorative  service  is  to  continue  as  a 
monument,  erected,  as  it  were,  over  the  place  of  the 
Saviour's  death,  testifying,  through  all  time,  his  death 
and  sacrifice  for  man. 

9.  The  partaker  of  this  feast  should  examine  himself 
lest  he  eat  and  drink  unworthily. 

10.  He  who  eateth  and  drinketh  unworthily,  eateth 
and  drinketh  to  his  condemnation  or  judgment,  not  dis- 
cerning the  Lord's  body,  and  is  guilty 'of  his  body  and 
blood. 

11.  Another  ]Hnii\  clearly  expressed  in  1  Corinthians 
X,  16,  and  resulting  by  direct  inference  from  some  of 
the  latter  statements,  is,  that  the  Lord's  Supper  is  a 
means  of  grace  to  the  worthy  recipient.  Christ's  death 
is  the  world's  life.  The  symbols  of  the  Lord's  body  and 
blood,  taken  in  remembrance  of  his  death — a  remejn- 
brance  wherein  I'aith,  j>assing  over  from  the  visible 
symbols  to  the  crucified  Saviour,  lays  hold  of  that  sac- 
rifice as  the  soul's  redemption,  righteousness,  and  sanc- 
tification — this  reception  oi  the  consecrated  symbols 
quickens  and  sanctifies  the  soul.  The  commemoration 
thus  becomes  a  means  of  grace.  Faith's  remembrance 
ol'  the  union  of  Christians  with  each  other,  and  of  all 
with  Christ;  of  the  fact,  that  we  being  many  are  one 
bread  and  one  body,  for  we  are  all  partakers  of  that 
one  bread;""  faith's  remembrance  of  this  blessed  truth 

^*  1  Corinthians  x,  17. 


156  THE  jlord's  supper. 

awakens  love  to  Christ  and  to  each  other  in  the  heart 
of  the  worthy  recipients.  In  this  way  it  is  a  means  of 
grace.  And,  again,  that  it  is  a  means  of  grace,  is  im- 
plied in  the  direction  to  examine  ourselves  before  we 
eat  and  drink;  and  in  the  assertion,  that  the  unworthy 
eat  and  drink  judgment,  not  discerning  the  Lord's  body. 
By  these  expressions,  it  is  implied  that  they  who 
worthily  partake  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  do  it  not  to  their 
condemnation,  but  to  their  approval  and  acquittal  in  the 
sight  of  God;  and  that  it  becomes  us  to  examine  our- 
selves, that  we  may  be  prepared  to  partake  worthily  of 
the  holy  feast,  with  an  eye  which  discerns  the  broken 
body  of  our  Lord  given  for  our  salvation,  and  a  heart 
that  appropriates  him  as  all  our  salvation  and  all  our 
desire. 

It  is  believed  that  there  is  no  important  element  in 
the  Scriptural  description  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
Supper  omitted  in  the  above  enumeration.  That  each 
of  the  points  enumerated  are  found  in  their  right  place 
and  proportion  in  our  admirable  service,  is  what  we 
shall,  in  another  chapter,  endeavor  to  demonstrate.  At 
present,  it  will  suffice,  in  the  conclusion  of  this  chapter, 
to  ascertain  what  is  the  chief  design  of  this  holy  service. 

"Christ  crucified"  is  the  great  central  doctrine  of  the 
Gospel.  It  is  the  key-stone  of  the  arch  which  supports 
the  weight  of  a  lost  Avorld's  redemption.  Other  Scrip- 
ture truths,  disconnected  from  it,  neither  support  any 
thing,  nor  are  supported.  St.  Paul  determined  to  know 
nothing;  else  among  those  to  wlion)  he  was  sent.  The 
prophesies  of  the  Old  Testament  point  to  it.  The  types 
of  the  Old  Testament  shadow  it.     In  short,  it  is  the 


THE  lord's  supper.  157 

substance  of  God's  revelation  lo  lost  man.  It  is  that 
on  which  the  sinner  must  depend  for  iorgiveness,  for 
redemption,  for  tlie  renewal  of  his  nature,  for  his  title 
for  admission  into  Heaven.  Without  figure  and  without 
abatement,  "Christ  is  all  in  all"  to  ( ondemned  and 
polluted  man.  The  design  of  all  revelation,  from  its 
beginning  to  its  close,  is  to  hold  up  Chiist  slain  as  the 
world's  ransom.  Now-,  it  is  before  thi>  dread,  myste- 
rious, potent,  life-imparting,  throned  truth — Christ 
CRUCIFIED — that  the  soul  of  man  must  be  brought  and 
detained,  that  it  may  render  to  it  homage,  receive  from 
it  law,  accept  from  it  forgiveness,  obtain  the  renewing 
spirit,  be  drawn  by  the  power  of  the  sweetly  constrain- 
ing love  beaming  from  it,  till  all  its  powers  are  surren- 
dered to  Christ,  and  filled  with  Christ.  Of  this  great 
truth,  Christ  has  left  a  great,  significant,  and  blessed 
MEMORIAL.  As  we  assign  the  first  place  among  Scrip- 
ture truths  to  the  revelation  of  Christ  ci  ueified  for  us, 
so  should  we  assign  the  first  place  among  all  the  ordi- 
nances appointed  by  Christ  and  his  disciples,  or  insti- 
tuted by  the  Church  to  that  commemorative  service  in 
which  the  Saviour  is  again  evidently  set  forth  crucified 
among  us.  In  instituting  the  Sacrament  of  his  death, 
('hrist  had  respect  to  the  same  design  which  he  had  in 
view  in  submitting  to  the  crucifixion.  It  was  by  his 
death,  believed  in  and  accepted  by  the  sinner  as  his 
soul's  atonement,  that  man  was  to  be  saved.  But  this 
truth  he  knew  would  be  foolishness  to  the  wise,  and  a 
stumbling-block  to  the  carnal.  He  knew  that  sinful  men 
would  hate  it,  and  that  Satan  would  veil  it  from  the 
view  of  a  perishing  world,  whose  only  hope  it  was.  He 


158  THE  lord's  supper. 

therefore  made  provision  that  this  great  saving  truth 
should  be  preserved,  and  evidently  seen  of  all  men  to 
be  THE  TRUTH,  by  the  reception  of  which  alone  men 
could  live  again.  He  instituted  but  one  oft-to-be-re- 
peated Sacrament  in  his  Church.  He  established  no 
memorial  of  his  mysterious  Incarnation,  his  shining 
Transfiguration,  his  mighty  Resurrection,  or  his  glorious 
Ascension  By  the  Sacrament  of  his  death  provision 
was  made  that  this  great  saving  truth  should  be  per- 
petually showed  forth  till  his  coming  again.  He  was 
lifted  upon  the  cross,  that  he  might  offer  a  full, 
perfect,  and  sufficient  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world.  He  was  symbolically  lifted  upon  the 
cross,  in  the  memorial  of  his  death,  in  the  breaking  of 
bread  and  the  pouring  forth  of  wine,  that  men  might  be 
directed  to  his  atoning  merits,  and  that  those  who  com- 
memorated his  sacrifice  might  vividly  realize  it  through 
that  commemoration,  as  its  expressive  sign;  and  might, 
with  humble  confidence,  appropriate  its  blessings,  by 
tlie  reception  of  the  Sacrament  as  a  heaven-stamped 
and  assuring  seal.  He  who  loves  the  Saviour,  and 
trusts  only  in  his  merits,  will  love  and  honor  the  memo- 
rial of  his  dying  love. 

"  When,  therefore,  you  have  the  elements,  the  bread 
and  wine,  delivered  into  your  hands,  do  but  seriously 
think  with  yourselves,  '  Now  God  is  delivering  a  broken, 
a  bleeding  Saviour  unto  me.  If  I  will  by  faith  receive 
him,  he  testifies  and  seals  by  his  bread  and  wine  that  I 
shall  certainly  receive  remission  of  my  sins  and  ever- 
lasting life  through  him.'  Let  us,  therefore,  say,  'Lord 
Jesus,  I  now  accept  of  thee  upon  thine  own  terms,  on 


THE  lord's  supper.  159 

the  very  conditions  on  which  thou  art  pleased  to  tender 
thyself  unto  me.  I  take  a  broken  Christ  for  my  entire 
Saviour;  a  Christ  crowned  with  thorns  as  my  alone 
King.  He  shall  be  my  Prophet,  whom  the  blasphemous 
Jews  buffeted  and  derided  with  a  *  Prophesy  who  smote 
thee  !'  As  I  reach  forth  my  bodily  hand  to  receive  the 
bread  and  the  wine,  so  I  reach  forth  the  spiritual  hand 
of  my  faith,  to  receive  that  Christ  whose  body  was  thus 
broken,  and  whose  blood  was  thus  poured  forth'  Now, 
to  those  only  who  thus  by  faith  receive  Christ  Jesus, 
who  thus  eat  his  flesh  and  drink  his  blood,  the  Sacra- 
ment doth  seal  and  confirm  that  they  shall  have  eternal 
life  by  him,  and  shall  be  raised  up  at  the  last  day  to 
that  glory  with  which  he  is  invested."  *^ 

'*  Bishop  Hopkins  on  the  Two  Sacraments. 


VIII. 


«JI)c  Cork's  !5u|3|3cr. 


CONTINUKD. 


In  our  last  chapter  upon  the  Lord's  Supper,  we 
evolved  from  Uie  accornt  of  its  institution  given  by  the 
Evangelists,  and  from  other  references  to  it  found  in  the 
Word  of  God,  u'hat  we  supposed  to  be  the  prominent 
characteristic  of  that  blessed  Sacrament.  The  convic- 
tion was  confidently  expressed,  that  every  truth  which 
Scripture  contains  in  reference  to  this  holy  institution, 
will  be  found  transferred  to  that  sublime  service  in 
which  the  Church  commemorates  the  Redeemer's  dying 
love. 

It  is  a  characteristic  ol  that  divine  wisdom  which  is 
manifold,  that  it  connects  with  those  works  and  institu- 
tions which  have  one  great  primary  object,  other  and 
subordinate  ends  and  uses.  The  Sabbath  sacredly  set 
apart,  in  commemoration  of  God's  rest  from  the  work  of 
the  world's  creation,  for  worship,  and  for  cessation  from 
all  works  other  than  those  of  necessity  and  charity,  was 
also  designed  to  commemorate  the  release  of  the  Is- 
raelites from  Egypt, '  and  as  a  sign  of  the  separation  of 

'  Deut.  V,  15. 


THE    lord's    supper.  161 

the  Jews  from  all  other  nations,  to  make  them  remember 
that  it  is  the  Lord  who  sanctified  them.  ■  It  will  be 
entirely  in  analogy  with  God's  providential  dispensa- 
tions, and  with  his  other  positive  institutions,  if  we  find 
in  the  Lord's  Supper  one  primary  intent  connected  with 
other  subordinate  and  kindred  aims. 

What,  then,  is  the  nature  of  the  Lord's  Supper  ? 
What  is  its  chief  character,  its  main  design  ?  What  is 
that  primary  and  prominent  characteristic  which  should 
give  it  its  name  ? 

Several  of  the  points  which  we  have  gathered  from 
the  Scripture  account  of  this  institution,  have  reference 
to  the  manner  in  which  it  was  established  and  to  be 
celebrated;  and  some  of  them  to  the  ends  and  blessings 
connected  with  its  chief  design.  If  in  the  brief  Scrip- 
ture records  on  this  subject  we  turn  to  those  only  expres- 
sions which  bear  on  the  subject  of  its  nature  and  design, 
their  meaning  seems  clear  and  unequivocal.  When  our 
Saviour,  instituting  the  Sacrament,  said,  "  Take,  eat, 
this  is  my  body,"  and  '<  Drink  ye  all  of  this,"  cup,  "  for 
tliis  is  my  blood  of  the  New  Testament,"  we  have  seen, 
that  inasmuch  as  he  regarded  the  wine  as  wine  after  he 
had  called  it  his  blood,  his  meaning  was  that  the  bread 
and  wine  were  the  signs  or  representatives  of  his  bodv 
and  blood.  ^  In  the  gospel  of  St.  Luke,  we  find  the 
Saviour,  in  enjoining  it,  expressing  the  purpose  for 
which  it  was  enjoined:  "This  do  in  remembrance  of 
me."     When  the  risen  Saviour  communicated  to  St. 

2  Ezek.  XX,  12,  20;  Ex.  xxxi,  13. 

^This  point  is  very  fully  and  convincingly  proved  by  Dr.  Stone. 
Mysteries  Opened,  p.  285. 


162  THE  lord's  supper. 

Paul  the  account  of  its  institution,  the  instituting  words 
which  describe  the  nature  and  object  of  the  Sacrament 
are  prominent  and  repeated  :  "  This  do  in  remembrance 
of  me;"  "  This  do  ye,  as  oft  as  y^  drink  it,  in  remem- 
brance of  me."  And  again;  "As  oft  as  ye  eat  this 
bread  and  drink  this  cup,  ye  do  show  the  Lord's  death 
till  he  come."  Now,  as  the  Saviour  does  enjoin  it  upon 
his  disciples  to  partake  of  this  Sacrament  in  remem- 
brance of  him,  and  does  not  specify  any  other  object  of 
its  institution,  there  can  be  no  possible  error  in  the 
inference,  that  the  primary  object  of  its  institution  was, 
that  it  should  be  a  perpetual  memorial  of  his  death 
upon  the  cross,  as  an  atonement  for  the  world's  sin. 
That  word  describes  its  primary  object;  that  is  the  name 
which  designates  its  generic  character.  To  this  divine- 
ly instituted  and  obligatory  memorial  of  his  death,  Christ 
has  assigned  several  offices,  and  attached  various  bless- 
ings. It  is  a  seal  of  the  New  Covenant  wherein  for- 
giveness of  sins  is  pledged;  it  is  a  sign  of  the  spiritual 
union  of  believers;  it  is  a  perpetual  witness  to  the  world 
of  the  sacrifice  of  the  cross;  it  i.s  a  means  of  grace 
whereby  the  faithful  recipient  obtains  quickened  faith, 
deep^  love,  and  new  graces  of  the  spirit. 

Such  as  we  have  found  this  Sacrament  in  the  Word 
of  God,  we  shall  find  it  also  in  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.  Its  primary  design,  its  various  usts,  its  atten- 
dant blessings,  and  the  mode  of  its  institution,  will  all  be 
found  in  their  proper  place  and  proportion  in  our  admi- 
rable service. 

I.   Immediately  on  entering  upon  that  portion  of  "  The 


THE  lord's  suppfr.  163 

Order  for  the  Administration  of  the  Lord's  Supper," 
which  has  direct  reference  to  the  Sacrament,  we  are 
met  by  expressions  which  indicate  that  its  primary  na- 
ture and  design  is  that  of  a  memorial.  Does  the  Minis- 
ter give  warning  that  he  will  admini.'>ler  the  Sacrament 
to  those  who  are  "  religiously  and  devoutly  disposed  ?" 
It  is  "  to  be  by  them  received  in  remembrance  of  his 
meritorious  cross  and  passion,  whereby,  (that  is,  by 
the  cross  and  passion,)  alone  we  obtain  remission  of  our 
sins,  and  are  made  partakers  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven. " 
Does  he  earnestly  expostulate  with  those  who,  being 
'Movingly  called  and  bidden  by  God  himself,"  refuse 
to  come  to  the  holy  feast  ?  The  ground  of  the  solemn 
duty  is,  then,  expressed  in  these  explicit  words.  "And 
as  the  Son  of  God  did  vouchsafe  to  yield  up  his  soul, 
by  death,  upon  the  cross  for  your  salvation,  so  it  is 
your  duty  to  receive  the  Communion  in  remembrance  of 
the  sacrifice  of  his  death,  as  he  himself  hath  command- 
ed." Is  the  table  of  the  Lord  spread,  and  does  the 
Priest  exhort  the  people  to  come  in  a  right  spirit  to  the 
blessed  commemoration  ?  His  pointed  injunction  is 
that,  ^^  above  all  thiiigs,  they  are  to  give  humble  and 
hearty  thanks  for  the  redemption  of  the  world  by  the 
death  and  passion  of  their  Saviour  Christ,  both  God  and 
man;"  and  this  is  followed  by  his  explicit  assertion, 
that  the  object  of  the  institution  was,  that  they  might 
ever  remember  that  precious  death.  And  to  the  end 
that  we  should  always  remember  the  exceeding  great 
love  of  our  Master  and  only  Saviour,  thus  dying  for  us, 
and  the  innumerable  benefits  which,  by  his  precious 
blood-shedding,  he  hath  obtained  for  us,  he  hath  insti- 


164  THE    LORDS    SUPPER. 

tuted  and  ordained  holy  mysteries  as  pledges  of  his 
love,  and  for  a  continual  remembrance  of  his  death,  to 
our  great  and  endless  comfort.  Does  the  officiating 
Minister,  standing  before  the  table,  pronounce  the  con- 
secrating words  ?  They  are  the  words  which  the  Sa- 
viour revealed  to  St.  Paul,  in  which  he  bids  the  disci- 
ples eat  and  drink  in  remembrance  of  him.  Does  he, 
after  the  consecration,  in  the  name  of  himself  and  the 
people,  declare  his  compliance  with  the  Saviour's  dying 
words,  and  offer  the  privileged  service  for  God's  forgiving 
acceptance  ?  His  language  is,  "  We,  thy  humble  ser- 
vants, do  celebrate  and  make  here  before  thy  divine 
majesty,  with  these  thy  holy  gifts,  which  we  now  offer 
unto  thee,  the  memorial  thy  Son  hath  commanded  us 
to  make,  having  in  remembrance  his  blessed  passion  and 
precious  death."  Does  he  invoke  God's  Holy  Word 
and  Spirit  to  bless  and  sanctify  the  bread  and  wine  } 
It  is  "  to  the  end  that  we,  receiving  them  according  to 
our  Saviour  Christ's  holy  institution,  in  remembrance  of 
his  death  and  passion,  may  be  partakers  of  his  most 
blessed  body  and  blood."  Are  the  consecrated  ele- 
ments delivered  to  the  kneeling  and  solemnized  com- 
municants ?  The  same  object  which  has  been  seen  to 
pervade  all  the  preceding  service  is  here  briefly  and 
finally  enjoined.  "  Take  and  eat  this  in  remembrance 
that  Christ  died  for  thee,  and  feed  on  him  in  thy  heart 
by  faith  with  thanksgiving."  "  Drink  this  in  remem- 
brance that  Christ's  blood  was  shed  for  thee,  and  be 
thankful." 

The  primary  nature,  the  end,  the  design  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  is  thus  found  to  be,  in  this  service,  as  in  the 


THE  lord's  supper.  165 

Scriptures,  that  it  may  be  a  memorial  of  the  Saviour's 
sacrifice  lor  sin.  This  Sacrament,  whose  name  and 
cliaracter  is  memorial,  has  many  blessings  connected 
with  it,  all  of  which  are  recognised  and  set  forth  in  our 
service  as  they  are  in  the  Word  of  God.  Every  part 
of  that  service  will  be  found  to  have  significance  and 
propriety  in  connection  with  some  one  or  other  of  the 
ends  and  uses  assigned  to  it  in  the  Scriptures. 

And  here  it  may  be  proper  to  notice  the  principle 
upon  which  our  Church  has  constructed  those  services 
in  which  ordinances  of  divine  institution  and  obligation 
are  celebrated.  While  siie  has  retained  in  them  all 
things  necessarily  and  inseparably  connected  with  their 
original  institution,  she  has  not  felt  bound  to  abstain 
from  the  exercise  of  her  "authority  to  ordain,  change, 
and  abolish  ceremonies  or  rites  of  the  Church,  ordained 
only  by  man's  authority,  so  that  all  things  be  done  to 
eili tying,'"  by  such  additions  to  the  original  mode  of 
their  institution,  as  carry  out  more  fully,  or  harmonize 
with,  their  original  design.  On  this  ground,  she  intro- 
duces the  sign  of  the  cross  at  the  service  of  infant 
Baptism.  This  principle  of  the  Church  was  violently 
attacked  by  the  Puritans,  and  defended  by  Hooker,  with 
his  usual  calm,  comprehensive,  and  conclusive  reason- 
ing. While  Cartwright  insisted,  that  "it  was  best  to 
come  as  near  to  the  manner  of  celebration  of  the  Supper 
which  our  Lord  Christ  used,  as  may  be,"  Hooker  con- 
tended, that  "to  do  throughout  every  the  like  circum- 
stance which  Christ  did  in  this  action,  were  by  follow- 


*  Article  XXXIV. 


166  THE    lord's    SUPt»Efti 

ing  his  footsteps  in  that  sort  to  err  more  from  the 
purpose  he  aimed  at,  than  we  now  do  by  not  following 
them  with  so  nice  and  severe  strictness,"''  The  intro- 
duction ol"  the  commandments,  the  offering  of  alms  and 
oblations,  and  other  portions  of  the  service,  while  they 
form  no  part  of  the  original  institution  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  will  be  seen  to  harmonize  with  the  design  of 
its  establishment. 

II.  We  have  seen  that  one  of  the  important  designs 
of  the  Lord's  Supjjer  is,  that  it  should  be  "a  seal  of  the 
New  Covenant  for  the  remission  of  sins,  made  through 
the  blood  of  the  Redeemer;  a  seal  which  God  affixes  to 
his  covenant,  and  to  which  we  anew  subscribe  our  faith- 
ful adherence-as  often  as  we  commemorate  the  Saviour's 
death  in  this  memorial."  This  office  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per gives  us  a  high  idea  of  its  importance,  and  of  the 
solemnity  with  which  it  should  be  approached.  We 
come  to  renew  our  solemn  covenant  with  God.  We 
come  to  see  the  Saviour  graciously  re -impress  the  seal 
of  his  foi'giveness  of  all  o\u'  sins,  and  the  conveyance  of 
all  other  benefits  of  his  passion,  on  the  condition  of 
renewed  repentance  and  faith;  and  to  sign  anew  our 
promise  of  a  faithful  fulfilment  of  the  terms  prescribed. 
Well  may  the  Apostle  give  the  admonition,  "Let  a  man 
examine  himself,  and  so  let  him  eat  of  that  bread  and 
drink  of  that  cup!"  Well  may  the  Church  warn  Us  of 
the  "peril  of  the  unworthy  receiving  thereof !"  Well 
may  she  with  affectionate  fervency  admonish  us  that. 


^Hooker's  Eccl.  Pol.,  vol,  i,  p.  418. 


THE  lord's  supper.  167 

"as  the  benefit  is  great  if,  with  a  true  penitent  heart 
and  lively  faith,  we  receive  that  holy  Sacrament,  so  is 
the  danger  great  if  we  receive  the  same  unworthily." 

In  this  renewal  of  our  covenant  with  God,  it  is  mani- 
fest that  we  must  make  a  new  and  solemn  profession  of 
compliance  with  its  conditions.  Those  conditions  are 
repentance  and  faith,  and  the  renewed  consecration  to 
God  of  our  lives  and  substance,  presented  to  him  as  an 
offering,  which  we  beseech  him  to  accept,  "not  weigh- 
ing our  merits,  but  pardoning  our  offences."  A  large 
portion  of  the  service  is  occupied  with  incitements  and 
exhortations  to  the  faithful  performance  of  these  condi- 
tions, with  the  prayer  that  we  may,  or  with  the  profes- 
sion that  we  do,  comply  with  them,  and  with  an  outward 
act — the  offering  of  ahiis — significant  of  the  same. 

Viewed  in  this  light,  how  appropriate  it  is  that  the 
Ten  Commandments  should  stand  at  the  entrance  of  the 
service,  at  once  to  present  to  us  our  rule  of  life,  and  to 
convict  us,  by  the  remembrance  of  their  repeated  viola- 
tion, of  the  sin  which  makes  it  necessary  that  we  should 
lay  hold  upon  the  New  Testament  in  Christ's  blood  ! 
How  cheering,  under  the  felt  condemnation  of  the  law, 
to  listen  to  the  teachings  and  messages  of  the  Epistles 
and  the  Gospel,  and  to  see  those  living  epistles,  the  lives 
of  apostles,  saints,  and  martyrs.  It  is  in  perfect  har- 
mony with  the  same  design  that  the  sermon,  which  it 
may  be  supposed  will  refer  to  the  manner  and  spirit  in 
which  we  should  come  to  the  holy  table,  should  succeed. 
How  appropriate,  also,  in  view  of  the  same  end,  that  we 
should  have  presented  to  us  the  simple  but  sure  test  of 
our  glad  consecration  to  God  and  love  to  man,  which  is 


168  THE  lord's  supper. 

furnished  by  the  Offertory;  in  which  we  are  enabled, 
by  an  immediate  act,  to  give  a  pledge  of  the  sincerity 
of  our  professed  subjection,  and  a  significant  symbol  of 
the  entireness  of  our  consecration.  It  is  an  expression 
of  the  same  spirit  of  surrender  to  him  and  love  to  his 
people,  which,  in  the  prayer  for  the  Church  militant, 
presents  the  offered  alms  and  the  oblations  of  the  bread 
and  wine  for  the  Sacrament  to  God  for  his  acceptance, 
and  utters  a  fervent  prayer  for  the  universal  Church. 
The  Exhortations,  which  are  to  be  addressed  to  the 
communicants  on  some  occasion  previous  to  the  celebra- 
tion of  the  Lord's  Supper,  contemplate  the  same  object, 
and  admonish  those  who  expect  to  come,  that  they 
recall  their  sins,  that  they  make  full  purpose  of  amend- 
ment, that  they  make  restitution  for  all  injuries  and 
wrongs  done  by  them,  and  that  they  forsake  all  sin.  At 
the  time  of  the  celebration,  with  the  same  great  end 
prominently  in  view,  they  are  bidden  to  examine  them- 
selves with  searching  faithfulness,  whether  they  have 
"a  true  penitent  heart  and  hvely  faith,"  that  they  may 
worthily,  and  to  their  great  benefit,  receive  the  holy 
Sacrament.  And  when  the  invitation  to  draw  near  is 
pronounced,  it  is  extended  to  those  only  who  "do  truly 
and  earnestly  repent  of  their  sins,  and  are  in  love  and 
charity  with  their  neighbors,  and  intend  to  lead  a  new 
life,  following  the  commandments  of  God,  and  walking 
henceforth  in  his  holy  ways.  Then  in  the  confession 
follows  the  act  of  penitence;  and  in  the  absolution  the 
authorized  declaration  that  if  their  repentance  be  sin- 
cere, and  their  faith  real,  their  sins  are  pardoned,  and 
they  may  worthily  receive  and  subscribe  to  the  heavenly 


THE  lord's  supper.  169 

e;eal  of  forgiveness.  Comforting  sentences  of  Scripture 
confirm  that  autlionzed  declaration  of  remitted  sins,  that 
the  hearts  of  God's  covenanting  children  may  not  doubt 
or  waver  in  their  faith.  Then  their,  hearts  are  lifted 
into  the  serene  realization  of  their  privileges  as  God's 
children,  and  pardoned  sinners  join  with  sinless  angels 
in  the  anthem  of  heaven  to  their  common  God  and 
Father.  ' 

After,  bv  the  j)rayer  of  Consecration,  the  elements  of 
bread  and  wine  are  set  apart  in  ''memory,"  or  as  a 
memorial  "of  the  full,  perfect,  and  sufficient  sacrifice, 
oblation,  and  satisfaction  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 
world,"  there  follows  on  the  part  of  the  Priest,  in  behalf 
of  all  the  people,  a  solemn  oblation  of  those  holy  gifts, 
as  the  memorial  commanded  by  the  Saviour.  We  have 
professed  to  exercise  repentance  and  faith.  We  have 
presented    our    alms,"   oblations,    thanksgivings,    and 

"In  addiiion  to  the  alms  to  be  offered  at  the  Communion,  provi- 
sion was  made  by  the  first  Injunction  of  Edward  in  1547,  for  a 
larger  supply  of  the  wants  of  the  poor,  tlirough  the  offerings  of  the 
people  to  the  poor  chest,  which  was  permanently  fixed  within  the 
church.  Here  is  the  regulation  upon  the  subject.  "They  (i.  e. 
Deans,  Prebendaries,  &c. ,  &c.)  shall  provide  and  have,  three  months 
after  this  visitation,  a  strong  chest  with  a  hole  in  the  upper  part 
thereof,  to  be  provided  at  the  charge  and  cost  of  the  parish,  having 
three  keys,  whereof  one  slTall  remain  in  the  custody  of  the  parson, 
vicar,  or  curate,  and  the  other  two  in  the  custody  of  the  church  war- 
dens, or  any  other  two  honest  men,  to  be  appointed  by  the  parish 
from  year  to  year ;  which  chest  you  shall  set  and  fasten  near  unto 
the  high  Altar,  to  the  intent  that  the  parishioners  should  put  into  it 
their  oblations  and  aims  for  their  poor  neighbors.'.*— />ywnc/i<m«o/ 
Kir^  Edward  VI.     See  .Ippendix  to  Burnet  and  Collier. 

So,  also,  in  the  Injunctions  of  dueen  Elizabeth,  issued  at  her 
8 


170  THE   lord's    supper. 

prayers,  and  earnestly  besought  God  that  he  would  accept 
them.     And  now  that  the  highest  act  of  our  religion,  in 
which  we  anew  receive  a  visible  seal  of  forgiveness, 
and  anew  profess  that  compliance  with  the  terms,  with- 
out which  the  ordinance  seals  no  benefit  received,  but 
only  a  curse,  threatened  and  impending,  is  about  to  be 
performed;  in  a  moment  when,  by  our  sincerity  or  faith- 
lessness, we  are  about  to  take  to  our  bosoms  a  heavenly 
blessing  or  a  condemning  wo,  is  it  not  altogether  proper 
that  we  should  make  an  oblation  of  this  high  act  of  wor- 
ship, on  which  are  suspended  such  mighty  issues,  in 
the  same  way  that  we  presented  our  alms  and  prayers 
for  God's  forgiving  acceptance?     Is  it  not  proper  that, 
under  a  deep  sense  of  a  want  of  fervency  and  steadiness 
in  our  purposes  and  services,  we  should  lift  a  fervent 
invocation  for  God's  blessing  that  we  may  so  receive 
this  privilege  and  perform  this  service,  as  not  to  fail  of 
receiving  the  benefits  procured  by  his  death,  and  sealed 
to  us  in  this  blessed  memorial?  It  is  a  moment  in  which 
the  heart  should  most  earnestly  implore  God  to  receive, 
the  memorial  gifts  which  we  present,  and  accept  the 
memorial  service  which,  according  to  his  gracious  com- 
mand, we  offer,  beseeching  "Him  mercifully  to  accept 
this  our  sacrifice  of  praise  and  thanksgiving."     It  is  a 
moment  in  which,  while  we  prajf  for  the  reception  of 
his   highest  blessing,   even   that   "we   may  obtain  the 
remission  of  our  sins  and  all  other  benefits  of  his  pas- 
accession,  requiring  it  to  be  made  wiicther  "they  (i.  e.  Proprieta- 
ries, Parsons,  &c.)  have  provided  and   have  a  strong  chest  for  the 
poor  man's  box ;  and  set  and  fasten  the  same  in  a  place  of  the 
church  most  convenient." — Idtm. 


THE    LORD^S    SUPPER.  itl 

sion,"  that  we  "may  be  filled  with  his  grace  and  hea- 
venly benediction,  and  made  one  body  with  him,  that 
he  may  dwell  in  us  and  we  in  him,"  it  is  meet  that  we 
offer  the  highest  act  of  devotion  to  him  in  these  expres- 
sive and  solemn  words:  "And  here  we  offer  and  present 
unto  thee,  0  Lord,  ourselves,  our  souls  and  bodies,  to 
be  a  reasonable,  holy,  and  living  sacrifice  unto  thee." 

All  those  parts  of  the  Communion  Service,  then, 
which  prepare  for,  enjoin,  pray  for,  or  express  re- 
pentance and  faith;  all  which  contain  the  offering  up  of 
our  prayers  and  services  and  alms;  all  in  which  there 
is  a  presentation  of  our  celebration  of  this  holy  service, 
and  our  prayers,  as  "  sacrifices  of  praise  and  thanks- 
giving," and  of  ourselves  as  "living  sacrifices;"  all 
these  portions  of  the  Communion  Service,  are  proper 
for  us  who  are  about,  in  the  memorial  of  our  sacrifice 
for  sin,  to  receive  the  covenant  assurance  of  the  bene- 
fits of  his  passion  conveyed  to  us  by  faith,  and  assured 
to  us  by  this,  the  Saviour's  own  attesting  seal. 

And  this  leads  us  to  remark,  that  as  there  are  large 
portions  of  the  service  which  have  reference  to  our  ful- 
filment of  the  conditions  of  the  covenant  in  Christ's  blood, 
so  there  are  also  other  portions  which  refer  to  the  bles- 
sings conveyed  to  us,  and  sealed  to  us,  on  that  fulfil- 
ment. They  are  contemplated  all  along  through  the 
service,  in  connection  with  those  acts  of  repentance, 
faith,  obedience,  love,  and  consecration  of  means  and 
services,  with  which  they  are  inseparably  connected. 
Those  blessings  arc,  in  one  place,  summarily  expressed 
by  the  phrase,  "  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  all  other 
benefits  of  nis  passion."     They  appear  throughout  the 


1'72  THE  lord's  supper. 

service  to  be,  for  the  11101^1  part,  comprised  and  contem- 
plated under  the  two  divisions  of  the  forgiveness  of 
sins,  and  the  consequent  sanctification  of  the  spirit. 
They  are  sometimes  prayed  for  as  the  blessing  promised 
and  desired,  and  sometimes  spoken  of  as  the  blessing  ac- 
tually in  possession.  By  the  New  Testament  in  Christ's 
blood,  the  soul  is  justified,  and  receives  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Enabled  by  that  Holy  Spirit,  faith  lays 
hold  of  the  promises  of  God  in  Christ,  and  receives  the 
continued  accessions  of  grace  by  which  the  soul  is 
strengthened  and  sanctified  more  and  more.  The  Spirit, 
by  taking  the  things  of  Christ  and  showing  them  to  the 
heart,  strengthens  and  confirms  all  its  giaces — love,  joy, 
and  peace  in  the  Holy  Ghost.  Thus  the  soul  feeds  on 
Christ,  on  his  dying  mediation,  on  his  broken  body  and 
shed  blood.  It  so  feeds  upon  him  in  this  blessed  Sa- 
crament. By  the  aid  of  the  expressive  and  divinely 
consecrated  symbols  of  bread  and  wine,  the  soul  takes 
the  truth  that  the  Son  of  God  was  crucified  for  its  salva- 
tion, and  feeds  upon  it,  and  glows  with  strengthened 
and  quickened  life.  The  partaking  of  the  sacramental 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  is  thus  coincident  with  the 
soul's  reception  of  the  strengthening  and  sanctifying 
doctrine  of  a  slain  Redeemer.  That  this  Sacrament  is 
at  the  same  time  a  divine  symbol,  and  a  heavenly  seal 
of  forgiveness,  and  of  all  the  benefits  of  redemption,  is 
a  double  aid  to  faith  in  appropriating  the  benefits 
of  the  Saviour's  passion.  Hence,  the  language  of  St. 
Paul:  "The  cup  of  blessing  which  we  bless,  is  it  not 
the  communion  (the  joint  participation)  of  the  blood  of 
Christ  ?     The  bread  which  we  break,  is  it  not  the  com- 


THE  lord's  supper.  173 

munion  of  the  body  of  Christ  ?"  Hence,  the  Church, 
in  this  service,  appropriates  the  figurative  language  of 
Jesus  Christ  in  the  sixth  chapter  of  St.  John,  and  ap- 
plies what  the  Saviour  there  says  of  the  reception  of 
his  doctrine  in  general,  to  the  reception  of  the  specific 
doctrine  of  his  death  as  a  sacrifice  for  sin.  Sometimes 
she  has  reference  only  to  the  inward  act  of  faith  by 
which  the  soul  takes  the  death  of  Christ  as  its  redemp- 
tion, righteousness,  and  sanctification,  and  calls  it  an 
eating  of  the  flesh  and  drinking  of  the  blood  of  the  Son 
of  Man.  Sometimes  she  refers  to  that  complex  action 
in  which  we,  at  the  same  time,  exercise  a  living  faith 
in  a  crucified  Redeemer,  and  receive  the  significant 
symbol  of  his  broken  body  and  shed  blood,  and,  on  our 
part,  sign  the  already  heaven-signed  seal  of  the  cove- 
nant of  redemption,  and  calls  that  celebration  of  the 
heavenly  feast,  which  consists  of  both  this  outward  and 
inward  part,  a  participation  or  eating  and  driifking  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ.  Freely,  however,  as  this 
language  is  used  in  the  Communion  Service  in  reference 
to  the  complex  act  spoken  of  above,  or  to  the  act  of 
faith  alone,  it  is  not  applied  to  the  reception  of  the 
symbols  without  the  exercise  of  faith;  thus  showing  that 
the  eating  and  drinking  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
has  always  reference  to  the  soul's  appropriation  of  the 
benefits  of  his  passion.  The  language  which  the  Com- 
munion service  so  freely  uses,  the  Article  (XXVIII) 
accurately  explains.  "  The  body  of  Christ,"  says  the 
Article,  "  is  given  and  taken  and  eaten,  in  the  Lord's 
Supper,  only  after  a  heavenly  and  spiritual  manner;  and 
the  mean   whereby  the  body  of  Christ  is  received  and 


174  THE  lord's  supper. 

eaten  in  the  Supper  is /mV//,;"  and  that  it  is,  in  the 
view  of  the  Church,  by  the  act  of  faith  that  we  eat  and 
drink  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  is  clear,  also,  from 
her  language  in  the  rubric  for  the  Communion  of  the 
Sick. 

''  But  if  a  man,  either  by  reason  of  extremity  of  sick- 
ness, or  for  want  of  warning  in  due  time  to  the  Minister, 
or  for  lack  of  company  to  receive  with  him,  or  by  any 
other  just  impediment,  do  not  receive  the  Sacrament  of 
Christ's  body  and  blood,  the  Minister  shall  instruct  him, 
that  if  he  do  truly  repent  him  of  his  sins,  and  steadfastly 
believe  that  Jesus  Christ  hath  suifered  death  upon  the 
cross  for  him,  and  shed  his  blood  for  his  redemption, 
earnestly  remembering  the  benefits  he  hath  thereby,  and 
giving  him  hearty  thanks  therefor,  he  doth  eat  and  drink 
the  body  and  blood  of  our  Saviour  Christ  profitably  to 
his  soul's  health,  although  he  do  not  receive  the  Sacra- 
ment with  his  mouth. ' 
# 

^  We  attribute  the  early  and  rapid  purification  of  the  Church 
from  superstitions,  at  the  time  of  Edward,  to  the  clear  and  decided 
adoption  of  the  principle  involved  in  this  rubric,  viz.,  the  principle 
that  it  is  from  GoiVs  werd  that  all  spiritual  comfort  is  to  be  derived. 
This  great  truth  is  beautifully  stated  in  the  first  injunctions  of  Edward 
VI.  Superstitious  vestiges  could  not  long  remain  with  men  who 
could  speak  and  feel  in  this  manner: 

"  Also,  because  those  persons  who  be  sick  and  in  peril  of  death,  be 
oftentimes  put,  in  despair  by  the  craft  and  subtelty  of  the  Devil, 
who  is  then  most  busie,  and  especially  with  them  who  lack  the 
knowledge,  steadfast  belief  and  sure  purswasion,  that  they  may  be 
madepartakers  of  the  great  and  infinite  mercy  which  Almighty  God, 
of  his  most  bountiful  goodness  and  mere  liberality,  without  our  de- 
serving, hath  offered  freely  to  all^persona  who  put  their  full  trust  and 


THE  lord's  supper.  175 

We  need  not  long  dwell  on  those  portions  of  the  ser- 
vice, so  numerous  and  prominent,  in  which  the  bles- 
sings connected  with  Christ's  covenant  are  spoken  of  as 
received  in  this  holy  Sacrament.  In  the  Exhortation, 
it  is  declared  to  be  our  duty  to  "  render  most  hearty 
thanks  to  Almighty  God,  our  Heavenly  Father,  for  that 
he  hath  given  his  Son,  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  not 
only  to  die  for  us,  but  also  to  be  our  spiritual  food  and 
sustenance  in  that  holy  Sacrament."  In  the  prayer 
which  is  said  in  the  name  of  all  the  people,  immediate- 
ly before  the  Institution,  we  pray,  "  Grant  us,  therefore, 
gracious  Lord,  so  to  eat  the  flesh  of  thy  dear  Son  Jesus 
Christ,  and  drink  his  blood,  that  our  sinful  bodies  may 
be  made  clean  by  his  body,  and  our  souls  washed  by 
his  most  precious  blood,  and  that  we  may  evermore 
dwell  in  him  and  he  in  us."  In  the  Invocation,  the 
prayer  is  oifered  that  we  may  so  receive  the  creatures 
of  bread  and  wine, — blessed  by  his  Word  and  Holy 
Spirit, — that  <<  we  may  be  partakers  of  his  most  blessed 
body  and  blood."  In  the  same  Invocation,  accompany- 
ing the  offering  of  ourselves,  our  souls  and  bodies,  as  a 
living  sacrifice,  is  the  prayer,  that  "  we  and  all  others, 

confidence  in  him.  Therefore,  that  this  damnable  view  of  despair 
may  be  clearly  taken  away,  and  firm  belief  and  steadfast  hope  surely 
conceived  of  all  their  parishioners,  being  in  any  danger,  they  shall 
learn,  and  have  always  in  readiness,  such  comfortable  places  and 
sentences  of  Scripture,  as  do  set  forth  the  mercy,  benefits  and  good- 
ness of  Almighty  God  toward  all  penitent  and  believing  persons, 
that  they  may  at  all  times  (when  necessity  shall  require)  promptly 
comfort  their  flock  with  the  lively  word  of  God,  which  is  the  only  stay 
cj/"  man's  comcienct. 


176  THE    lord's    supper. 

who  shall  be  partakers  of  this  holj  Communion,  may 
worthily  receive  the  most  precious  body  and  blood  of 
thy  Son  Jesus  Christ,  be  filled  with  thy  grace  and 
heavenly  benediction,  and  made  one  body  with  him, 
that  he  may  dwell  in  them  and  they  in  him."  After 
having  communicated,  we  return  thanks  to  God  in  this 
form:  "  We  most  heartily  thank  thee  for  that  thou  dost 
vouchsafe  to  feed  us,  who  have  duly  received  these  holy 
mysteries,  with  the  spiritual  food  of  the  most  precious 
body  and  blood  of  thy  Son  Jesus  Christ."  • 

Having  thus  shown  that  the  two  prominent  charac- 
teristics of  the  Lord's  Supper  occupy  the  same  place  in 
the  service  of  our  Church,  as  they  do  in  the  institution 
of  the  Saviour,  as  recorded  in  the  Word  of  God,  it  will 
not  be  necessary  to  prove  the  same  thing  with  so  much 
minuteness  in  reference  to  the  other  points  which  were 
gathered  from  the  various  Scripture  records,  as  belong- 
ing to  this  holy  Sacrament. 

IIL  Some  of  those  points  have  reference  to  the  man- 
ner of  its  institution,  and  some  to  the  blessings  con- 
nected with  its  right  reception,  or  to  the  condemnation 
which  falls  on  those  who  receive  the  same  unworthily. 
In  all  particulars  which  are  not  merely  incidental — such 
as  celebrating  the  service  in  an  upper  room,  and  with 
the  accompaniments  of  the  Jewish  Passover — it  will  be 
found  that  our  Church  has  reverently  adhered  to,  and 
carried  out,  the  design  of  the  Saviour. 

"Bread  and  wine,"  without  permission  to  mix  the 
wine  or  change  the  bread  into  the  wafer  or  other  form, 
are  provided  as  the  matter  of  the  Sacrament,     Thanks 


THE  lord's  supper.  177 

ami  blessings  are  ofieied  to  God,  and  the  elements  them- 
selves are  blessed,  preparatory  to  a  participation  in  the 
feast.  We  have  already  seen  that  the  bread  and  wine 
are  regarded  as  symbols  for  a  memorial  of  Christ's 
death,  and  for  a  seal  of  forgiveness,  and  of  other  spiritual 
blessings.  The  use  of  the  Sacrament  as  a  moral  monu- 
ment of  the  Saviour's  death,  is  expressed  in  the  prayer 
of  consecration,  where  it  is  spoken  of  as  that  which 
Christ  "did  institute,  and  command  us  to  continue  as  a 
perpetual  memory  or  memorial  of  his  precious  death  and 
sacrifice,  till  his  coming  again."  Its  character,  as  a 
sign  and  seal  of  the  union  and  communion  of  Christians 
with  each  other,  is  expressed  in  the  invocation  and  in 
the  prayer  which  succeeds  the  participation  of  the  bread 
and  wine.  In  the  former,  the  prayer  is  offered  that  we 
"may  be  made  one  body  with  him;"  and  in  the  latter, 
thanks  are  offered  that  God  does  by  this  holy  Sacrament, 
"assure  us  that  we  are  very  members  incorporate  in  the 
mystical  body  of  his  Son."  That  the  partakers  of  this 
feast  should  earnestly  examine  themselves,  is  the  reit- 
erated injunction  of  the  Exhortations.  That  they  who 
eat  and  drink  unworthily,  eat  and  drink  to  their  con- 
demnation, and  that  it  is  a  means  of  grace  to  the  worthy 
recipient,  is  abuiuiantiy  set  forth  in  those  passages  which 
we  have  already  quoted,  which  have  reference  to  the 
blessings  received  in  this  Sacrament  by  those,  who,  in 
the  renewal  of  their  covenant  with  God,  exercise  sin- 
cere repentance  and  true  faith.  It  would  be  an  easy 
task,  but  superfluous,  to  show  with  more  minuteness, 
the  correspondency  of  this  service  of  the  Church  with 
the  Scriptural  account  of  the  Supper  of  the  Lord.  Thank- 
8* 


178  THE  lord's  supper. 

ful  we  are,  that  while  our  Church  has  rejected  every 
thing  in  doctrine  or  in  practice,  which  superstition  has 
added  to  this  holy  feast,  she  has  retained  every  thing 
which  accords  with  the  design  of  its  institution,  so  that 
her  children  may  not  be  deprived  of  any  of  the  bless- 
ings prepared  for  them  by  the  Saviour's  \o\e,  as  they 
"feed  on  the  banquet  of  that  most  heavenly  food  !" 

Papid  as  our  enumeration  of  the  ends  and  uses  of  this 
heavenly  feast  has  necessarily  been,  it  has  been  suffi- 
cient to  show  the  great  dignity  of  this  holy  Sacrament, 
and  the  duty  of  so  preparing  for  its  right  reception,  that 
we  may  not  lose  its  manifold  blessings.  If  we  have  a 
low  appreciation  of  its  dignity  and  blessedness;  if  we 
come  to  it  expecting  little  in  its  reception;  if  we  fail  to 
examine  ourselves;  if  we  approach  without  renewed 
repentance  and  faith;  if  we  come  without  the  solemnity 
and  collectedness  of  spirit,  which  become  fliose  who  are 
performing  a  renewed  act  of  covenant  with  God,  with 
all  the  conditions  and  duties  on  the  one  hand,  and  all 
the  blessings,  temporal  and  eternal,  on  the  other,  lying 
out-spread  before  the  soul;  if  this  be  the  spirit  in  which 
we  approach  the  table  of  the  Lord,  we  shall,  as  we  come 
to  it  without  the  enjoined  preparation,  leave  it  without 
the  promised  blessing.  Tf  we  gather  together  the  bless- 
ings of  the  holy  Sacrament,  and  meditate  upon  them, 
though  it  be  but  briefly,  can  we  fail  to  feel  that  in  it  we 
may  enjoy  our  highest  privilege,  and  he  drawn  into 
nearest  communion  with  our  Saviour? 

1.  As  a  MEMORIAL  of  his  death,  how  great  are  its 
blessings.!'  That  death,  proclaimed  by  the  living  herald 
of  salvation,  or  by  God's  Holy  Word,  is  the   truth  by 


THE    lord's    supper.  179 

which  the  Spirit  saves  and  sanctities  the  soul.  Those 
"visible  words,''  the  symbols  of  Christ's  blessed  body 
broken,  and  his  precious  blood  shed,  are  made  by  the 
Spirit  to  show  that  redocMuiiiir  death  yet  more  vividly 
to  the  heart.  In  our  ConiinuiiioK  Service,  accordingly, 
we  pray  that  God  would  sanctify  them  by  his  Word  and 
Hoi}'  Spirit,  as  we  pray  that  he  would  sanctify,  or 
accompany  with  sanctifying  power  his  holy  truth,  that 
we,  rightly  receiving  them,  may  obtain  the  same  bless- 
ings which  follow  the  proper  rece])tion  of  the  life-giving 
Word.  When  we  come  to  that  holy  feast,  how  are  we 
aided  to  view  Christ  thus  evidently  crucified  before  our 
eyes,  and  how  should  we  improve  the  gracious  aids 
thus  afforded  us,  to  gaze  upon,  till  we  deeply  love  that 
wondrous  sufferer,  out  of  whose  more  than  tragic  woes 
sprung  our  joys,  out  of  whose  dying  came  our  life,  from 
whose  burial  rose  our  resurrection!  Then  aided  faith 
recalls  the  past,  and  it  lives  again.  If  we  look  on  a  dying 
Saviour  only  with  the  eye  of  recollection  and  not  of 
faith,  we  shall  view  it  as  a  still  picture,  not  as  a  rej)re- 
sented  reality,  whose  sounds  are  heard  by  us,  and  whose 
sights  pass  before  us.  Look  upon  the  sufferer!  Heaven 
and  hell  are,  and  earth  should  be,  amazed  at  that  spec- 
tacle! "Consider,  were  there  a  sight  to  be  represented 
at  which  heaven  and  earth  and  hell  itself  should  stand 
amazed;  wherein  (iod  himself  should  suffer,  not  only  in 
the  form  of  a  scrvatil  but  under  the  form  of  a  malefactor; 
and  the  everlasting  happiness  of  all  mankind  from  the 
creation  of  the  world  to  the  final  dissolution  of  it  should 
be  transacted;  in  which  we  might  see  the  venom  and 
the  poisonous  malignity  of  the  sins  of  the  whole  world 


180  THE    lord's    supper. 

wrung  out  into  one  bitter  cup,  and  this  cup  put  into  the 
hands  of  the  Son  of  God  to  drink  off  the  very  dregs  of 
it;  in  which  we  might  see  the  gates  of  hell  broken  to 
pieces,  devils  conquered,  and  all  the  powers  of  their 
dark  kingdom  triumphed  over.  I  say,  were  there  such 
a  sight  as  this,  so  dreadful  and  yet  so  glorious,  to  be 
represented  to  us,  would  we  not  all  desire  to  be  spec- 
tators of  it?  Why,  all  this  is  frequently  represented  to 
us  in  the  Sacrament.  There  we  may  see  the  Son  of 
God  slain,  the  blood  of  God  poured  out.  We  may  see 
him,  who  takes  away  our  transgressions,  numbered  with 
with  the  transgressors.  We  may  see  him  hanging  upon 
the  soreness  of  his  hands  and  feet;  all  our  iniquities 
meeting  upon  him,  and  the  eternity  of  divine  vengeance 
and  punishments  contracted  in  their  full  extremity  into 
a  short  space.  We  may  see  the  wrath  of  God  pacified, 
the  justice  of  God  satisfied,  mankind  redeemed,  hell 
subdued,  and  devils  cast  into  everlasting  chains.  All 
this  is  to  be  clearly  seen  in  this  ordinance,  if  we  bring 
but  faith  to  discern  it;  without  which  indeed  all  thiti 
will  be  no  more  to  us  than  a  magnificent  and  exquisite 
scene  to  a  blind  man.""  All  this  passing  before  us,  we 
shall  look  on  him  whom  we  have  pierced  and  mourn; 
we  shall  take  part  with  God  against  our  sins,  and  look 
upon  them  with  holy  abh(rrence;  we  shall  be  awed  into 
solemn  views  of  the  justice,  and  be  thrilled  with  fearful 
realizations  of  the  dreadfulnes?.  of  the  wrath,  of  God; 
and  ficm  all  and  above  all,  will  rise  adoring  gratitude  to 
God  and  Christ,  for  "love  so  amazing,  so  divine!" 

"  Bishop  Hopkin's  Two  Covenants,  p.  149. 


THE    lord's    supper.  181 

2.  W  we  meditate  on  this  Sacrament  as  a  seal  of  our 
covenant  with  God,  we  shall  find  it  full  nf  blessings  for 
the  soul.  In  this  point  of  view  it  should  he  magnified, 
it  should  be  received  as  a  most  precious  assuring  token 
of  God's  mercy  and  forgiveness.  In  this  point  of  view, 
it  is  scarcely  possible  to  exaggerate  its  value.  Think  of 
it  !  We  have  in  Baptism  entered  into  covenant  with 
God.  We  were  admitted  to  the  privileges  of  his  earthly 
household,  the  Church,  and  have  had  assurances  of 
jiardon,  justification,  adoption,  regeneration,  and  sanc- 
tification.  We  have  them  still.  His  Holy  Word  assures 
us  that  they  are  ours,  if  we  do  not  sin  Ihem  away  and 
cast  them  from  us.  We  believe  it.  We  cannot  doubt  it. 
Still  our  many  transgressions,  the  remainin^j  sins  of  our 
hearts,  weigh  upon  us,  and  make  us  feel  that  it  is 
scarcely  possible  that  we  can  still  be  recognised  as  his 
children.  We  are  so  conscious  of  deserved  wrath,  that 
the  shadow  of  the  departing  curse  yet  rests  upon  our 
souls,  almost  as  darkly  as  the  curse  itself,  when  it 
gathered  over  them,  still  and  dreadful !  We  know  that 
when,  with  true  and  honest  purpose,  we  gave  ourselves 
to  Christ  in  the  vows  of  Baptism,  or  in  their  renewal  in 
Confirmation,  then  God  loved  us  and  accepted  us.  But 
does  he  love  us  now?  The  heart  yearns  for  some  tokeo 
of  acceptance,  and  of  continued  love  from  the  Father 
against  whom  we  have  so  often  sinned.  The  Word 
remains  to  us,  and  its  assurances  are  precious;  but  they 
are  to  us  as  the  letter  of  a  friend  long  since  received, 
whose  unchanging  affection  we  cannot  doubt,  buffrom 
whom  we  would  fain  receive  some  token  of  undimin- 
ished love,  some   new  assurances  of  affection.     And 


182  THE    LORDS    SUPPER. 

now  in  this  blessed  Sacrament  we  receive  such  a  token 
from  our  God.  In  this  expressive  service,  we  receive 
new  and  convincing  assurances  ot  pardon,  and  new  gifts 
of  grace.  We  are  brought  into  a  realized  and  close 
communion  with  our  heavenly  Father,  where  we  can 
hear  Willi  a  distinctness  which  the  voice  of  God  in  his 
Word  had  ceased  to  afford  us,  that  he  is  reconciled  to 
us  through  his  dear  Son.  In  this  commemoration,  he 
puts  upon  us  his  signet  ring  with  which  we  go  forth 
into  the  midst  of  the  enemies  of  our  souls,  an  assuring 
token  to  us,  and  a  confounding  token  to  them,  that  he 
is  our  God,  and  that  we  are  his  favored  and  accepted 
children.^ 

3.  Nor  is  this  blessed  Sacrament  less  calculated  to 
awaken  love  to  each  other  than  it  is  to  assure  us  of 
God's  love  to  us.  It  is  when  our  Christian  brethren  are 
seen  in  their  character  as  God's  children,  the  objects 
with  us  of  his  love  and  of  his  covenant  mercy;  when 
we  meet  them  at  the  heavenly  feast,  as  all  ])artakers 
with  us  of  that  one  bread,  that  we  are  enabled  to  realize 
that  we  being  many  are  one  bread  and  one  body.'"  Seen 
apart  from  this  union  with  Christ,  and  this  union  wit 
us  in  Christ,  their  human  imperfections  would  alienate 
our  hearts.  But  in  this  Sacrament  we  are  made  to  view 
them  in   their  high  character  as  heirs  together  with  us 


'  When  Cranmer  appeared  before  the  council  who  had  j>loitpd 
bis  ruin,  he  had  on  his  finger  the  ring  which  King  Henry  liad  given 
him,  and  at  the  sight  of  it  they  ceased  all  aciion  and  snbrnissur'y 
resorted  to  the  king,  and  then  fawned  on  him  they  would  have 
ruined. — Le  Bas's  Cranmer,  vol.  i,  p.  '213. 
'"ICor.  X,  17. 


THE  lord's  supper.  183 

of  the  grace  of  life,  as  all  joint  heirs  with  Christ  of  the 
heavenly  kingdom.  There  we  realize,  that  notwithstand- 
ing their  human  imperfections,  they  bear  the  image  of 
our  dear  Redeemer.  There  we  learn  the  lesson  of  for- 
giving and  forbearing  love.  There  we  are  reminded  of 
the  promised  feast  with  Chri.st  himself  in  heaven.  There 
we  are  made  to  see  that  God's  children  are  a  peculiar 
people,  strangers  and  pilgrims  in  the  world,  and  there- 
fore needing  each  other's  sympathy  and  love.  There, 
being  in  charity  with  all  the  world,  we  have  a  taste  of 
that  enjoyment  of  which  David  spake,  "Behold  how 
good  and  pleasant  a  thing  it  is  for  brethren  to  dwell 
together  in  unity!" 

4.  And,  after  this,  need  we  say  that  this  Sacrament 
is  a  means  of  grace,  and  should  be  as  such  greatly 
valued?  In  all  the  particulars  above  enumerated,  it  is 
found  to  promote  our  spiritual  welfare.  But  it  is  most 
of  all  as  a  commvnion  with  Christ  himself,  in  which  we 
enjoy  such  a  sense  of  his  presence  and  such  a  partici- 
pation of  the  blessings  of  his  redemption  as  is  expressed 
by  eating  his  flesh  and  drinking  his  blood;  it  is  in  this 
respect  most  eminently  a  means  of  grace.  The  Sacra- 
ment of  the  Lord's  Sujiper  has  every  ordinary  condition 
to  which  the  promise  of  the  Spirit's  sanctifying  power 
is  attached,  besides  those  which  are  peculiarly  its  own. 
Cliri.-^t,  for  instance,  promises  to  meet,  and  be  with  his 
people,  who  are  gathered  together  in  his  name.  They 
are  so  gathered  at  that  heavenly  feast.  He  promises 
grace  in  answer  to  his  people's  prayers.  There  they 
ascend  under  circumstances  calculated  to  make  them 
earnest  and  desiring.     His  richest  gifts  are  reserved  for 


184  THE  lord's  supper. 

the  strongest  exercise  of  faith.  There  faith  is  aided  in 
its  exercise  by  visible  signs  and  seals  of  invisible  gifts 
and  graces.  Blessing  is  connected  with  the  discharge 
of  every  duty,  and  the  reception  and  thankful  acknow- 
ledgment of  every  privilege.  There  the  grateful  child 
of  God  complies  with  the  Saviour's  dying  injunction, 
and  gladly  opens  his  heart  for  the  reception  of  the  pro- 
mised benefits  from  that  kind  Father  whose  commands 
aie  also  always  gifts.  Coming  to  the  commemoration 
of. the  Saviour's  death,  in  which  all  these  blessings 
meet  and  unite  upon  his  heart,  how  can  he,  if  he  come 
in  penitence  and  faith — how  can  he  do  otherwise  than 
enjoy  communion  with  his  Saviour  Christ?  How  can 
he  fail  to  dwell  in  him,  and  have  him  dwell  in  his  own 
opened  heart,  prepared  with  welcomes  for  his  coming? 
He  hears  the  injunction  of  Christ,  that  in  this  memorial 
he  should  show  forth  his  death  until  he  come.  He 
realizes  that  in  it  he  is  continuing  to  hold  up  Christ 
crucified  to  the  world  He  perceives  that  is  a  glorious 
office  of  the  (JIuuch  with  which  he  is  united,  from  age 
to  age,  to  present  to  the  world,  in  symbol,  a  continued 
and  repeated  crucifixion  of  that  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh 
away  the  sins  of  the  world.  He  feels  that  he  lays  hold 
of  that  chain  of  repeated  commemorations  which,  reach- 
ing from  the  upper  chamber  where  the  Passover  becomes 
the  Supper  of  the  Lord,  extends  to  him,  and  on  beyond 
him,  through  the  successive  generations  of  believers, 
till  it  is  united  to  Christ  as  he  comes  again  to  take  his 
faithful  ones  to  higher  feasts  and  more  immediate  inter- 
course! "All  one  in  Christ  Jesus!"  is  the  exclamation 
of  his  kindled  spirit,  as  he  realizes  the  blessedness  of 


THE  lord's  supper.  185 

the  fellowship.  Along  that  chain,  which  unites  Calvary 
to  the  mediatorial  throne,  there  come  vibrating  through 
his  spirit,  now  the  influences  of  redeeming  mercy  from 
the  cross,  and  now  renewing  and  sanctifying  graces 
from  the  throne.  Cold  is  the  heart  and  dead  the  faith 
which  finds  little  or  no  blessing  in  the  memorial  of  tHte 
dying  Saviour! 


IX. 


^\)c  Cork's  Slipper. 


CONTINUED. 


The  comparison  of  our  Communion  Service  with  the 
testimony  of  Scripture  on  the  subject  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per, has  shown  how  completely  our  Church  has,  in  that 
service,  adopted  the  language,  and  carried  out  the  inten- 
tion of  the  blessed  Saviour  in  its  institution.  It  would 
have  been  an  advantage  to  this  view  of  the  subject, 
previously  to  have  shown  the  fact,  that  the  Reformers 
who  composed  that  service  held  the  views  of  this  divine 
institution  which  we  have  drawn  from  the  Word  of  God; 
and  then  to  have  come  to  the  Communion  Service  with 
this  knowledge  of  the  mind  of  its  framers.  But  as  we 
traced  the  correspondence  of  the  service  with  the  Word 
of  God,  we  found  it  so  obvious  and  complete,  as  to  make 
such  a  course  unnecessary.  But  for  the  fact  that  great 
and  prevalent  error,  on  the  subject  of  the  Lord's  Supper, 
shelters  itself  under  our  Communion  Service,  we  might 
leave  the  opinions  of  the  Reformers  and  the  history  of 
the  service  altogether  untouched. 

In  attempting  to  designate  erroneous  views  upon  the 
subject  of  the  Eucharist,   we  feel  the  necessity  of  dis- 


THE  lord's  supper.  187 

criminating  between  language  which  may  be  injudicious 
at  the  present  time,  and  liable  to  lead  to  error,  but  which 
is  susceptible  of  a  sound  meaning,  and  has  the  sanction 
of  direct  or  analogous  Church  usage,  and  doctrines  dis- 
tinctly avowed,  for  the  explanation  and  enforcement  of 
which  such  language  is  confessedly  applied.  It  would 
be  unfair  to  charge  error  upon  those  who,  without 
avowing  their  adherence  to  an  erroneous  system,  use  a 
phraseology  which,  while  it  is  susceptible  of  an  unsound, 
is  also  susceptible  of  a  wholesome  interpretation.  We 
may  lament  such  a  course  as  injudicious.  We  cannot 
blame  it  as  heretical. 

Endeavoring  to  bear  this  principle  in  mind,  our  aim 
will  be  to  show  what  views,  advocated  by  some  mem- 
bers of  our  Church,  are,  in  our  opinion,  inconsistent 
with  the  word  of  God  and  with  our  standards,  and  of 
dangerous  consequence  to  the  purity  of  the  Gospel 
scheme  of  salvation,  and  to  the  spiritual  interests  of 
those  by  whom  they  are  embraced. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  our  service  speaks  with 
the  utmost  unreserve  of  eating  the  flesh  and  drinking 
the  blood  of  the  Son  of  Man;  of  our  dwelling  in  him 
and  of  his  dweUing  in  us.  To  speak,  then,  of  the  real 
presence  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  and  of  our  eating 
and  drinking  his  flesh  and  blood,  is  to  adopt  language 
sanctioned — by  analogy,  at  least — by  the  Church.  If, 
along  with  the  language  of  the  Church,  her  explanation 
of  the  meaning  of  that  language  be  adopted  and  ex- 
pressed, no  one  can  be  censured  for  its  use.  Our  cele- 
bration of  the  service,  our  presentation  of  alms  and 
oblations,  and  of  "the  holy  gifts"  of  bread  and  wine, 


188  THE  lord's  supper. 

and  ol' prayers  and  thanksgiving,  and  of  ourselves — our 
souls  and  bodies — is  called  a  ^'sncrifice,^^  and  "sacrifices'^ 
unto  God.  If  this  language  of  the  Church  be  adopted 
and  applied  to  the  same  objects,  and  used  in  the  same 
sense  in  which  it  is  used  in  the  Communion  Service, 
no  one  can  properly  object  to  this  authorized  usage  that 
it  is  in  itself  improper,  however  its  habitual  and  unex- 
plained use  may  be,  at  the  present  time,  ill-judged. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  the  word  Priest.  Even  the 
word  Altar,  though  banished  from  this  service,  because 
of  its  liability  to  bring  along  with  it  the  error  with 
which  it  had  been  long  associated,  yet,  because  found 
in  other  services,  may  be  rightfully — we  say  not  wisely 
— used,  if  along  with  its  use  there  is  ever  implied  or 
expressed  the  meaning  intended  by  the  Church. 

With  these  preliminary  observations,  we  proceed  to 
designate  those  views  which  we  regard  as  erroneous. 

The  "real  presence,"  as  explained  b}'^  the  writers  to 
whom  we  refer,  is  not  the  presence  of  Christ,  by  his 
Spirit,  to  the  heart  of  the  believer,  nor  the  presence  of 
his  once  broken  but  now  glorified  body  to  the  faith 
which  "lifts  up  the  heart"  to  heaven,  and  sees  him 
there,  and  lays  hold  of  him — crucified,  risen,  glorified — 
Prophet,  Priest,  and  King — and  appropriates  him  as  right- 
eousness, sanctification,  and  redemption,  and  receives 
from  him  the  pardon  of  sin  and  the  graces  of  the  Spirit; 
thus  spiritually  eating  the  flesh  and  drinking  the  blood 
of  the  Son  of  Man.  "The  real  presence  of  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ  in  the  elements,  as  distinguished 
from  wlint  would  be  understood  by  the  presence  of 
Christ  at  the  Sacrament,  is  unequivocally  atfirmed,  even 


THE    r.ORD's    SUPPER.  \^9 

the  ptef,encp  of  that  vpiy  fle.sh  and  hlood  whirh  were 
given  and  shed  for  the  life  of  the  world  !"  '  It  is  said 
to  be  "literally  true,"  that  "the  consecrated  bread  is 
Christ's  body."-  "The  real  and  essential  presence  of 
Christ's  natural  body  and  blood  at  the  Communion,"  is 
athrmed.'  The  exj)lanatic)iis  which  are  made  of  these 
expressions  disappoint  the  charitable  hope  that  they 
may  have  been  used  with  a  >ound  meaning.  A  figura- 
tive or  symbolical  presenrp  is  contemptttously  disowned. 
A  presence  of  the  body  to  t'aith  is  discarded,  for  it  is 
declared  "to  be  there  iiidi pendently  of  oui'  faith," ■■  and 
to  be  to  the  sinner  "his  Redeemer's  very  broken  body, 
and  his  blood  which  was  shed  for  the  remission  of 
sins."  Tlie  saciifice  of  the  Eucharist  is  not  a  sacrifice 
of  thanksgiving  and  praise,  and  the  offering  of  ourselves 
as  sacrifices  to  God  in  a  new  and  holy  life.  It  is  de- 
scribed as  the  offering  up  of  the  consecrated  bread  and 
wine,  made  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  as  a  sacrifice 
commemorative  of  that  offered  by  the  Saviour  upon  the 
cross;  and  that  by  it,  offered  by  the  Priest,  the  remis- 
sion of  the  sins  of  the  whole  Church  is  obtained,  and 
that  the  souls  of  the  departed  righteous  are  refreshed  by 
this  sacrifice.  '^  The  words  "Priest"  and  "Altar,"  are 
used  in  correspondence  with  this  word  sacrifice,  to 
signify,   the   one,   the  place  on  which  the   sacrifice   is 


'  Mysteries  Opened,  p.  256.  "  Tract  No.  XC. 

3 Tract  No.  LXXXVI. 

*  Dr.  Pusey's  Letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Oxford,  p.  86. 

*  Dr.  Pusey's  Sermon  on  the  Eucharist. 

*Sec  Goode's  Divine  Rule  of  Faith  and  Practice,  vol.  ii,  p.  112, 
et  seq. 


190  THE    lord's    supper. 

offered,  and  the  other,  the  sacrificer  or  the  offerer  up  of 
the  sacrifice  which  is  to  be  presented. ' 

Our  object,  it  will  be  remembered,  is  not  so  much  to 
show  the  disagreement  of  these  views  with  the  Word  of 
God,  as  to  prove  that  they  are  not  to  be  found  in  our 
Communion  Service.  We  are  confident  of  making  it 
appear,  not  only  that  our  Church  rejects  these  gross 
and  sensual  views  of  the  Eucharist,  but  that  throughout 
this  service  she  contemplates  and  admits  no  other  real 
presence  than  that  of  Christ,  by  his  Spirit,  in  the  hearts 
of  the  communicants,  or  that  of  his  now  glorified  body 
to  the  view  of  faith,  which  ascends  to  meet  him  and 
embrace  him ;  no  other  sacrifice  than  that  of  our  prayers, 
praises,  services,  and  renewed  vows  of  consecration;  no 
othei-  Altar  than  a  Table  figuratively  called  Altar;  and 
no  other  Priest  than  a  Presbyter,  sometimes  called 
Priest,  in  the  generic  sense  of  a  minister  of  God,  but 
never  in  a  specific  sense  as  the  offerer  of  a  sacrifice 
(sacerdos)  for  sin. 

In  referring  to  the  history  of  the  Communion  Service, 
in  proof  of  these  positions,  we  shall  show  how  carefully 
any  sanction  of  such  views  was  avoided  by  the  framers 
of  that  service.  I.  By  the  use  which  they  made  of  the 
ancient  Liturgies.  II.  By  the  care  which  they  mani- 
fested, on  a  revision  of  the  Liturgy,  to  expel  from  it 
whatever  seemed  to  sanction  such  views.  III.  By  refer- 
ence to  the   recorded   opinions  of  those  by  whom  the 

'  These  views,  and  the  multiplied  proofs  that  they  are  correctly 
represented,  may  be  seen  more  at  length  in  Goode's  Divine  Rule  of 
Faith  and  Practice,  Dr.  Stone's  Mysteries  Opened,  and  Bishop 
Hopkin's  "Third  Letter." 


THE    lord's    supper.  191 

service  was  framed,  and  of  some  others  near  to  them  in 
time,  whose  testimony  on  the  subject  is  regarded  as 
authoritative;  and  IV.  By  an  account  of  the  views  of  our 
own  Church  in  the  adoption  of  the  Communion  Service 
as  it  now  stands  in  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer. 

I.  That  our  Communion  Service  was  framed,  in  part, 
upon  the  model  of  the  ancient  Liturgies,  and,  in  some 
parts,  closely  resembles  them,  has  been  already  inti- 
mated. A  comparison,  however,  of  the  revised  Liturgy 
of  Edward  with  those  ancient  Liturgies,  will  show  that, 
in  many  j)articulars,  the  framers  of  that  service  deviated 
from  their  example.  They  refused  to  adopt  expressions 
found  in  those  offices,  which  appear  to  sanction  the 
views  which  we  have  described,  lest  they  might  seem 
to  countenance  errors  against  which  their  lives  and 
deaths  were  earnest  protests  and  testimonies.  Let  us 
collect  some  of  the  expressions  of  those  Liturgies  which 
were  not  adopted,  or  if  at  first  adopted,  were,  on  more 
mature  consideration  of  their  tendencies,  promptly  ex- 
cluded. 

In  the  Clementine  Liturgy,  regarded  as  one  of  the 
most  pure  and  ancient,  we  find  these  petitions:  "And 
send  down  thy  Holy  Spirit,  the  witness  of  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  Lord  Jesus,  on  this  sacrifice,  that  he  may 
make  this  bread  the  body  of  thy  Christ,  and  this  cup  the 
blood  of  thy  Christ.''  The  rubric  directs  that  the  Bishop 
shall  give  the  oblation,  saying,  "The  body  of  Christ; 
the  blood  of  Christ;  the  cup  of  life."  The  Liturgy  of 
St.  James  has  this  expression:  "We  sinners  offer  to 
thee,  O  Lord,  this  tremendous  and  unbloody  sacrifice,  be- 
seeching thee,"  &c.;  also  this  petition:  "Have  meicy 


192  THE  lord's  supper. 

upon  us,  O  God,  according  to  thy  great  mercy,  and 
send  down  upon  these  thy  gifts  which  are  here  set  be- 
fore thee,  thy  most  Holy  Spint.''^  In  the  same  Liturgy 
is  found  the  following  prayer  for  the  dead:  "Father,  we 
offer  to  thee  for  all  the  saints  who  have  pleased  thee 
fiom  the  beginning  of  the  world,  the  Patriarchs,  Pro- 
phets, righteous  Men,  Apostles,  Martyrs,  Confessors, 
Bishops,  Priests  and  Deacons,  Sub-Deacons,"  &c.,  &c. 
In  the  Clementine  Liturgy  a  rubric  directs  that  after  the 
Bishops,  Priests,  Deacons,  &c.,  have  communicated, 
then  "afterwards  the  children,  and  then  all  the  people 
in  order."  In  St.  James's  Liturgy  we  find  this  lan- 
guage: "Then  he  takes  the  cup  and  says,  'Likewise 
after  Supper  he  took  the  cup  and  mixed  it  with  wine  and 
water,  and  presenting  it  to  his  God  and  Father,  he  gave 
thanks,  and  sanctified  and  blessed  it,  and  filled  it  with 
the  Holy  Ghost.^^^  In  the  Liturgy  of  St.  Mark  there 
is  a  prayer  for  the  dead;  the  elements  are  signed  with 
the  sign  of  the  cross;  the  wine  and  water  are  said  to  be 
mixed;  of  the  cup  it  is  said  that  Christ  "blessed  it  and 
filled  it  with  the  Holy  Ghost. '^  The  Liturgy  of  St. 
Chrysostom  contains  a  prayer  that  God  would  change  the 
bread  and  wine  by  his  Holy  Spirit;  a  commemoration 
of  the  Virgin  Mary,  which  changes  to  an  invocation  to 
her  in  these  words:  "We  magnify  thee,  mother  of  God," 
and  the  burning  of  frankincense  before  the  Altar,  with 
many  other  ceremonies  unknown  to  us.  "After  the 
Priest  has  received,  he  decently  and  revei'ently  wipes 
the  holy  cup  and  his  own  lips  with  the  veil,  saying, 
'This  has  touched  my  lips  and  shall  take  away  mine 
iniquities,  and  purge  me  from   my  sins,  now  and  ever- 


THE  lord's  supper.  193 

more.'"  "The  Deacon  draws  near,  and  bending  down 
once,  says^  'Behold,  1  draw  near  to  thee,  itnmortal 
King."'  The  Priest  says,  "Thou,  O  Deacon,  the  ser- 
vant of  God,  receivest  the  precious  and  holy  body  and 
blood  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins  and  eternal  life!'^'*  The  Liturgy  of  St. 
Basil,  and  the  Ethiopian  Liturgy,  contain  many  similar 
expressions  to  those  above  extracted. 

This  very  brief  view  of  the  ancient  liturgies  will 
suffice  to  show  in  how  many  and  important  particulars 
our  Church  has,  in  her  Communion  Service,  deviated 
from  their  example.  Whether  all  these  expressions  of 
the  ancient  services  are  capable  of  a  sense  which  har- 
monizes with  the  Scripture  doctrine,  is  not  the  point 
before  us.  Our  object  is,  to  show  how  carefully  they 
have  been  avoided  by  the  framers  of  our  service,  and 
that  this  fact  proves  conclusively,  that  they  rejected  the 
views  which  these  expressions  may  be  supposed  to 
sanction.^ 


'='  Brett's  Ancient  Liturgies. 

"  In  Bishop  Jewel's  famous  challenge  to  the  Romanisls,  to  find 
"a  sentence  out  of  any  old  Catholic  doctor  or  father,  or  General 
Council,  or  Holy  Scripture,"  in  favor  of  any  one  of  twenty-seven 
specified  articles,  we  find  the  following:  "That  the  Priest  had  this 
authority  to  offer  up  Christ  to  the  Father;  or  that  any  Christian 
man  called  the  Sacrament  his  Lord  and  his  God;  or  that  the  people 
were  then  taught  to  believe  that  tlie  body  of  Christ  remaineth  in  the 
Sacrament  as  long  as  the  accidents  remain  there  without  corruption; 
or  that  the  sacrament  is  a  sign  or  token  of  the  body  of  Christ 
that  lieth  underneath  it;  or  that  whosoever  said  the  Sacrament  was 
a  figure,  a  pledge,  a  token,  a  remembrancer  of  Christ's  body,  had, 

9 


194  THE  lord's  supper. 

In  these  extracts  from  the  ancient  liturgies,  we  find 
the  prayer  that  God  would  change  and  make  the  ele- 
ments to  be  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  The  bread 
and  wine  are  given  as  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Saviour, 
without  any  expression  which  intimates  that  they  are  so 
only  as  a  Sacrament  or  memorial.  These  expressions 
are  regarded  by  Romanists  and  the  Oxford  Tract  writers 
as  favoring  their  views  of  the  real  presence.  The  ele- 
ments are  presented  as  a  tremendous  and  unbloody 
sacrifice,  and  the  touching  of  the  lips  to  the  wine  is  de- 
scribed as  purging  sins  and  taking  away  iniquities. 
Here  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist,  as  a  sacrifice  for 
sin,  seems  sanctioned.  The  words  Altar  and  Priest  are 
freely  used  in  these  services  in  a  way  which  has  been 
avoided  in  our  own  Liturgy,  however  capable  it  maybe, 
as  used  in  those  services,  of  being  explained  in  har- 
mony with  our  own.  It  will  be  observed,  also,  that 
Christ  was  said  to  have  filled  the  cup  with  the  Holy 
Ghost;  that  the  dead  were  commemorated  in  the  prayer; 
that  the  Virgin  was  magnified  by  invocation;  that  the 
wine  of  the  Sacrament  was  mixed  with  water;  that 
children  partook  of  the  Eucharist;  that  the  elements 
were  signed  with  the  sign  of  the  cross;  and  that  frank- 
incense was  burned  before  the  altar. 

Now,  turn  to  our  Communion  Service,  and  how  dif- 
ferent is  its  language!  how  carefully  has  it  avoided  all 
expressions  which  are  liable  to  perversion!  how  skilfully 

therefore,  been  adjudged  for  an  heretic."  This  challenge  is  a  proof 
of  the  confidence  of  the  Reformers  that  the  fatiiers,  in  the  use  of 
lemguage  strongly  figurative  and  hyperbolical,  held  the  same  views 
with  themselves. 


THE  lord's  supper.  195 

has  it  separated  what  is  pure  and  Scriptural  in  these 
services,  from  what  is  error  in  its  seed,  if  not  in  its 
growth  and  flowering!  Instead  of  the  prayer  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  would  change  the  elements  and  make  them 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  the  petition  is,  "Vouch- 
safe to  bless  and  sanctify  with  thy  Word  and  Holy  Spirit 
these  thy  gifts  and  creatures  of  bread  and  wine,  [so 
called  after  consecration,]  that  we,  receiving  them  ac- 
cording to  thy  Son  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ's  holy  in- 
stitution in  remembrance  of  his  death  and  passion,  may 
he  partakers  of  his  most  blessed  body  and  blood!"  The 
prayer  is  not  that  the  elements  may  be  changed  into 
Christ's  body  and  blood,  but  that  God,  by  his  Word  and 
Holy  Spirit,  would  make  them  to  us  visible  signs  of  in- 
ward grace,  and  seals  of  promised  forgiveness,  and  of 
other  benefits  of  Christ's  passion,  that  we  may  so  par- 
take of  them  in  this  their  consecrated,  holy,  spiritual 
character,  as  to  become  partakers  of  Christ's  body  and 
blood.  It  is  not  a  prayer  that  the  bread  and  wine  should 
be  made  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  but  that  we  may 
partake  his  body  and  blood  as  we  receive  their  signs. 
When  the  elements  are  distributed,  it  is  with  the  in- 
junction which  explains  that  they^xe  not  called  Christ's 
body  and  blood.  "The  body  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
which  was  given  for  thee,  preserve  thy  body  and  soul 
unto  everlasting  life!"  That  is,  may  Christ  crucified 
become  your  salvation!  Take  and  eat  this  [bread,  as  it 
is  called  after  the  consecration]  in  remembrance  that 
Christ  died  for  tliee,  and  feed  on  him  thus  remembered, 
as  the  body  feeds  on  tliis  bread,  in  tkij  heart  hy  faith 
with   thanksgiving!"     The   real  corporal  presence  re- 


196  THE    LORD^S    SUPPER. 

ceives  not  even  seeming  sanction  in  these  words,  as  it 
may  be  supposed  to  do  in  the  words  of  the  Clementine 
Liturgy.  Instead  of  the  tremendous  and  unbloody 
sacrifice,  the  reception  of  which  is  described  as  taking 
away  sin,  no  other  sacrifice  is  spoken  of  than  a  sacri- 
fice of  praise  and  thanksgiving,  and  the  livmg  sacrifice 
of  ourselves  to  God.  Instead  of  the  word  Altar,  the 
word  Table  is  uniformly  and  carefully  adopted.  There 
are  no  expressions  which  countenance  the  idea  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  is  joined  to  or  mixed  in  the  element  of  wine; 
no  commemoration  of  the  dead,  nor  invocation  to  the 
Virgin;  no  mixing  of  water  with  the  wine;  no  admis- 
sion of  children  to  the  Eucharist;  no  signing  of  the 
elements  with  the  sign  of  the  cross,  and  no  offering  of 
frankincense  before  the  Altar.  When  we  remember 
the  reverence  of  our  Reformers  for  the  fathers  of  the 
Church,  and  their  uniform  assertion  that  their  testimony 
on  the  subject  of  the  Eucharist,  rightly  understood, 
was  in  favor  of  their  own  views,  it  will  give  us  a  high 
idea  of  their  determined  opposition  to  the  errors  we 
have  specified,  to  find  that  they  have  deviated  from  the 
language  of  the  fathers,  whom  they  venerated  so  highly 
because  they  deemed  it  not  essentially  erroneous,  but 
liable  to  be  perverted  and  misunderstood.'" 

'"The  difference  between  our  Connmunion  Service  and  the  ancient 
liturgies  is  sufficiently  apparent  from  the  history  of  the  Non-Jurors, 
as  they  were  called,  who,  at  the  Revolution  of  1688,  refused  to  take 
the  oaths  of  allegiance  to  William  and  Mary.  A  party  of  them 
formed  anew  liturgy,  partly  on  the  model  of  the  first  book  of  Ed- 
ward, and  partly  on  that  of  the  ancient  services,  with  the  expressed 
view  of  restoring  to  the  English  Church  some  of  those  features  which 


THE  lord's  suppfr.  197 

n.   The  care  whicli  our  Reformers  manifested,  on  the 
revision  of  the  Liturgy,   to  exclude  whatever  appeared 

we  have  noticed  as  contained  in  the  early  liturgies,  and  not  found  in 
our  own.  The  "wsiiffes,"  as  they  were  called,  consisted  of  four 
points:  the  mixing  of  water  with  tfie  wine  in  the  Sacramental  cup. 
the  commemorating  of  the  faithful  departed  at  the  Altar;  the  conse- 
cration of  the  bread  and  wine,  and  the  using  of  the  prayer  of  Obla- 
tion before  distributing  the  elements.  (In  the  English  service  it  fol- 
lows the  distribution.)  Although  our  American  Book  of  Common 
Prayer  has  retained  the  two  latter  points  enumerated  among  the 
usages,  it  is  in  a  different  manner  from  what  they  were  found  in  the 
ancient  services,  as  it  will  be  seen  also  that  they  differ  from  the 
same  portions  of  the  service  in  the  first  book  of  King  Edward. 

As  we  have  mentioned  the  Non-Jurors,  we  would  remark  that 
there  is  a  Prayer-Book  composed  by  Deacon,  the  leader  of  the  sep- 
arating Non-Jurors,  which  we  should  suppose  would  precisely  suit 
the  Tractanan  writers  who  mourn  over  the  mutilated  condition  of 
our  Liturgy,  which  Calvinistic  hands  have  rifled,  as  they  say,  of  so 
many  precious  Catholic  rites  and  usages. 

This  book  was  composed  in  1734.  It  is  called  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer.  It  has  an  order  for  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer. 
After  it,  there  are  prayers  for  the  catechumens,  the  enurgumens,  the 
candidates  for  baptism,  and  the  penitents.  The  enurgumens  were 
supposed  to  be"  possessed  of  evil  spirits,  and  prayers  suitable  to  their 
condition  are  provided.  Next  follows  a  penitential  office,  to  be  used 
by  the  faithful  and  penitents,  on  Wednesdays  and  Fridays.  Then 
follows  the  Communion  Service.  Besides  the  m.ixture  of  water 
with  wine,  the  Priest  is  directed  to  sign  his  forehead  with  the  sign 
of  the  cross,  and  to  administer  the  elements  to  Deaconesses  and  in- 
fants, saying  simply,  (as  in  the  Clementine  Liturgy,)  "The  body  of 
Christ,  and  the  blood  of  Christ,  the  cup  of  life."  Chrism  is  used  in 
Confirmation,  and  the  rite  is  ordered  to  be  administered  to  infants. 
In  Baptism,  the  form  of  exorcism,  the  annointing  with  oil,  and  the 
trine  immersion  are  retained.  Milk,  honey,  and  white  garments, 
were  given  to  the  child,     Deaconesses  were  to  baptize  females. 


198       '  THE  lord's  supper. 

to  sanction  the  views  which  we  have  spoken  of  as  erro- 
neous, is  another  proof  that  they  utterly  and  strongly 
rejected  thern. 

We  need  but  briefly  to  repeat  what  has  been  said  with 
regard  to  the  first  formation  of  the  Communion  Service. 
The  formularies  of  faith  conLstructed  finder  Cranmer's 
eye,  during  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII,  all  unequivocally 
assert  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation — a  doctrine 
then  held  undoubtingly  by  Cranmer.  From  the  first 
Liturgy  of  Edward  this  doctrine  was  excluded.  In  that 
Liturgy,  however,  there  were  expressions  which,  while 
they  could  not  be  made,  even  seemingly,  to  sanction 
the  full  Romish  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  and  sac- 
rifice for  sin  in  the  Eucharist,  might  be  supposed  to  fa- 
vor a  corporal  presence  in  the  elements,  and  a  sacrifice 
other  than  that  of  praise  and  thanksgiving  and  personal 
consecration.  The  care  with  which  these  expressions 
were  modified  or  omitted,  is  conclusive  evidence  that 
such  views  are  designedly  excluded  from  the  Offices,  as 
they  are  from  the  Articles,  of  the  Church. 

In  the  first  Communion  Service  of  Edward,  the  word 
Altar  is  repeatedly  used  in  the  rubrics,  but  is  altogether 
omitted  in  the  second.  In  the  Exhortation,  to  those 
who  are  about  to  receive  the  Communion,  there  is  found 
this  expression:  "And  to  the  end,"  &c.,  "he  hath  left 
in  those  holy  mysteries,  as  a  pledge  of  his  love,  and  a 

There  is  a  form  for  consecrating  milk  and  honey.  There  are  col- 
lections for  private  devotion,  for  morning  and  evening  prayer,  for 
the  ancient  hours  of  prayer,  and  offices  for  daily  private  communion, 
and  for  the  commemoration  of  the  dead. 

Latheurv's  History  of  the  Non-Jurors,  p.  496. 


THE  lord's  supper.  199 

continual  remembrance  of  the  same,  his  own  blessed  body 
and  precious  blood  for  us  to  feed  upon  spiritually." 
Now  although  the  latter  clause  explains  the  method  in 
which  we  are  to  feed  on  Christ,  in  a  way  which  excludes 
the  idea  of  a  corporal  local  presence,  yet  as  the  body  and 
blood  are  said  to  be  left  in  the  holy  mysteries,  this  lan- 
guage was  omitted,  and  the  sentence  stands  thus:  "He 
hath  instituted  and  ordained  holy  mysteries,  as  pledges 
of  his  love  and  continual  remembrance  of  his  death  to 
our  great  and  endless  comfort."  The  change  is  indica- 
tive of  a  jealous  scrutiny  for  the  detection  and  exclusion 
of  every  expression  which  might  be  supposed  to  convey 
the  idea  of  a  corporal  presence  in  the  elements. 

In  the  Exhortation,  to  those  who  are  negligent  to  come 
to  the  Communion,  we  find  this  expression:  "For  whom 
(us  his  unworthy  servants)  he  hath  not  only  given  his 
body  to  death  and  shed  his  blood,  but  also  doth  vouch- 
safe, in  a  sacrament  and  mystery,  to  give  us  his  said 
body  and  blood.''''  That  the  body  and  blood  are  given  in 
a  sacrament  and  mystery  in  reality  guards  the  expres- 
sion for  a  Romish  sense;  but  inasmuch  as  the  expres- 
sion the  said  body,  (referring  to  that  which  was  crucified,) 
might  be  misunderstood  or  perverted,  it  was  altogether 
omitted,  and  this  simple  expression  substituted  in  its 
place:  "He  hath  given  his  Son  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ, 
not  only  to  die  for  us,  but  to  be  our  spiritual  food  and 
sustenance." 

The  word  corporas  found  in  one  of  the  rubrics — a 
word  whose  use  in  the  Romish  Church  implies  its  recep- 
tion of  a  body — in  connection  with  the  direction  that  the 
bread  be  laid  upon  it,  was  omitted  in  the  revision. 


200  THE  lord's  supper. 

A  commemoration  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  and  a  prayer 
for  the  dead,  is  found  in  the  prayer  for  the  whole  state 
of  Christ's  Church.  It  is  as  follows:  "And  here  we  do 
give  unto  thee,  most  high  praise  and  hearty  thanks,  for 
the  wonderful  grace  and  virtue  declared  in  all  thy  saints, 
from  the  beginning  of  the  world,  and  chiefly  in  the  glo- 
rious and  most  blessed  Virgin  Mary,  mother  of  thy  Son 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  and  God;  and  in  the  holy  Patriarchs, 
Prophets,  Apostles,  and  Martyrs,  whose  examples,  (0 
Lord,)  and  steadfastness  in  thy  faith,  and  keeping  thy 
holy  commandments,  grant  us  to  follow.  We  commend 
unto  thy  mercy,  (0  Lord,)  all  other  thy  servants,  which 
are  departed  hence  from  us  with  the  sign  of  faith,  and 
now  do  rest  in  the  sleep  of  peace;  grant  unto  us,  we  be- 
seech thee,  thy  mercy  and  everlasting  peace;  and  that, 
at  the  day  of  the  general  resurrection,  we  and  all  they 
which  be  of  the  mystical  body  of  thy  Son,  may  alto- 
gether be  set  on  his  right  hand,  and  hear  that  his  most 
joyful  voice,  Come  unto  me,"  &c.  With  a  caution  we 
may  regard  as  excessive,  the  revisors  of  the  service  not 
only  altogether  omitted  the  commemoration  of  the  Vir- 
gin Mary  and  holy  men,  and  the  prayers  for  the  dead, 
but  they  excluded  also  that  form  of  petition,  now  found 
in  the  English  service  and  our  own,  to  which  no  objec- 
jection  can  be  made — "Beseeching  thee  to  give  us  grace 
so  to  follow  their  good  examples,  that  niith  them  we  may 
be  partakers  of  thy  heavenly  kingdom!" 

In  the  prayer  of  Consecration  is  this  petition,  "Hear 
us,  (0  merciful  Father,)  we  beseech  thee,  and  with  thy 
Holy  Spirit  and  Word  vouchsafe  to  bl-^ess  and  sanc-|-tify 
these  thy  gifts.and  creatures  of  bread  and  wine,  that  they 


THE    lord's    supper.  201 

may  be  wxto  us  Ike  body  and  blood  of  thy  most  dearly  be- 
loved Son  Jesus  Christ."  The  language  is  changed 
from  a  petition  that  the  elements  may  be  to  us  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ,  into  a  prayer  that  we  may  so  re- 
ceive them — "the  creatures  of  bread  and  wine" — "that 
we  may  be  partakers  of  his  most  blessed  body  and 
blood.  "'^ 

After  the  Consecration,  the  Oblation  and  Invocation 
follow  in  the  first  book  of  Edward.  The  revised  book 
contains  the  Consecration — w^ith  the  omission  which  we 
have  mentioned — hut  omits  the  Oblation,  and  has  placed 
the  Invocation  after  the  distribution  of  the  elements.  To 
the  latter  fact,  we  shall  have  occasion  to  refer  as  con- 
clusive of  the  point,  that  the  framers  of  the  Liturgy  con- 
templated no  other  sacrifice  than  that  of  praise  and 
thanks  and  vows. 

Immediately  before  the  invitation  to  the  communicants 
to  draw  near  and  make  their  humble  confession,  there 
are  found  in  the  first  service  these  words: 

Then  the  Priest  shall  say,  The  peace  of  the  Lord  be 
with  you. 

The  Clerks.   And  with  thy  spirit. 

The  Priest.  Christ,  our  Pascal  Lamb,  is  offered  up 
for  us  once  for  all  when  he  bare  our  sins  in  his  body  on 
the  cross;  for  he  is  the  very  Lamb  of  God,  that  taketh 


"The  second  cause  why  the  foresaid  prayer  is  to  be  refused,  is, 
for  ihiit  it  prays  that  the  bread  and  wine  may  be  Christ's  body  and 
blood,  which  makes  for  the  popish  transubstantiation,  which  is  a 
doctrme  which  hath  caused  much  idolatry;  and  though  the  Doctors 
so  speak,  we  must  spnak  otherwise,  because  we  lake  them  otherwise 
than  they  meant  or  would  be  taken.  "--Gwes(<<>  ►Sir  Win.  Cecil,  p.  53. 

9* 


202  THE  lord's  supper. 

away  the  sins  of  the  world;  wherefore,  let  us  keep  a 
joyful  and  holy  feast  with  the  Lord."  For  what  object 
these  words  were  omitted  we  cannot  tell,  unless  it  were 
to  remove  expressions  which  might  be  explained  to  favor 
the  idea  of  a  feast  upon  a  sacrifice : — an  idea  intimately 
connected  in  the  minds  of  many  with  the  doctrine  of  an 
Eucharistic  offering  for  sin. 

We  have  before  adverted  to  the  fact,  that,  upon  the 
distribution  of  the  elements,  they  were  presented  with 
these  words  only:  "The  body  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
which  was  given  for  thee,  preserve  thy  body  and  soul 
unto  everlasting  life.  The  blood  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  which  was  shed  for  thee,  preserve  thy  body  and 
soul  unto  everlasting  life."  At  the  revision  of  the 
service,  these  words  were  omitted,  and  this  form 
adopted:  "Take  and  eat  this  in  remembrance  that  Christ 
died  for  thee,  and  feed  on  him  in  thy  heart  by  faith  with 
thanksgiving."  "Drink  this  in  remembrance  that 
Christ's  blood  was  shed  for  thee,  and  be  thankful." 
It  is  well  known  that  the  change  was  made  from  an 
apprehension,  that  the  first  form  would  tend  to  counte- 
nance and  keep  up  in  the  minds  of  the  people  an  idea 
of  a  corporal  presence  of  Christ  in  the  Sacrament.  The 
two  forms  were  connected  at  a  subsequent  revision 
under  Elizabeth,  because  the  latter  clauses  were  re 
garded  as  forming  an  explanation  of  the  meanuig  of  the 
former. 

In  the  offering  of  thanks  after  all  had  communicated, 
this  absolute  form  of  expresssion  tvas  adopted:  "  We 
most  heartily  thank  thee,  that  thou  hast  vouchsafed  to 
feed  us,  in  these  holy  mysteries,  with  the  spiritual  food 


THE    LORP's    srPPF.R.  203 

of  the  most  precious  body  and  blood  of  thy  Son  our  Sa- 
viour Jesus  Christ."  This  laii2;uage  might  be  interpre- 
ted to  import  that  all  the  partakers  had  actually  fed 
upon  the  body  and  blood  ot  the  Saviour,  whether  they  had 
exercised  faith  or  not,  and  thus  to  imply  a  presence  of 
Christ,  '^^independent  of  faith."  This  expression — 
significant  of  a  design  to  express  the  opposite  sentiment — 
was  introduced:  "•  Thai  thou  dost  vouchsafe  to  feed  us, 
who  have  duly  received  these  holy  mysteriest^  with  the 
spiritual  food  of  the  most  precious  body  and  blood  o{  thy 
Son  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ."'- 

Upon  a  review  of  these  changes  from  the  first  service 


'-  T  e  astoumlin?  iissertion  of  Palmer,  (on  the  Churcli,  vol.  i.  p. 
475,)  thai  "  it  uppertrs,  ihen,  that,  during  the  reign  of  Edward  VI, 
the  Church  nnade  no  idieration  in  doctrine,  [from  that  of  the  fur- 
iiiulari<'.«!  of  Henry  VIIF,]  except  in  leaving  the  mode  of  tlie  real 
presence  in  the  Eucharist  undetermined,''  has  been  well  exposed 
by  Bishop  Hopkins,  in  his  "Third  Letter."  It  is  true,  that  Mr. 
Palmer  afterwards  strangely  clianses  his  language  after  this  sort: 
"Altogether!  do  not  Sfc  that  there  is  ani/  very  great  contradiction 
between  these  twn  for  nularies,  [the  XXX.IX  Articles  and  the 
Npcp.ssarv  Docirinr,)  in  matters  of  doctrine."  This  latter  ex- 
pression we  i',an  harillv  reconcile  with  the  former.  By  the  first 
senten<'.e  it  is  declared,  tjiat  "the  Church  made  no  alteration  m 
doi-irine,  except.''^  &-.;  while,  by  liie  latter,  it  is  admitted  that 
there  is  contradiction,  though  not  a  very  gieiU  one.  Of  degree:*  of 
contradiction,  Tracianan  writers  may  be  able  to  form  some  con- 
cention,  bat  the  rest  of  the  world  know  nothing.  If  the  Article."  be 
contradictory  to  the  Necessary  Doctrine,  they  arc  contradictory, 
and  that  is  the  end  of  it.  I  su.iiiose  W'-  are  to  reconcile  the  two 
assertions  of  Mr.  Palmer,  in  the  same  way  that  he  reconciles  these 
two  opposite  foriTiularies  of  faith,  by  the  eminently  Tractarian 
explanation  that  there  is  no  very  great  contradiction  between  them. 


2.04  THE  lord's  supper. 

of  Edward,  introduced  into  the  second,  which  was  pub- 
lished but  three  years  after,  nothing  can  be  clearer  than 
the  fact  of  the  determination  of  the  framers  of  the  Lit- 
urgy not  only  to  bring  down  the  upas  tree  of  Romanism, 
but  to  root  out  its  minutest  fibres  from  the  soil,  that  it 
might  not  sprout  again  in  the  garden  of  the  Lord,  and 
cast  blight  and  death  over  the  trees  of  righteousness 
which  their  hands  had  planted.  After  those  giant  men 
had,  with  panting  and  earnest  blows,  cut  through  the 
close-grained  trunk,  the  compact  growth  of  centuries, 
and  brought  it,  with  a  crash  that  startled  the  nations,  to 
the  ground,  and  with  efforts  of  herculean  strength  moved 
off  the  broken  and  heavy  limbs,  and  the  rotten  rubbish 
— the  nests  of  foul  birds  on  its  topmost  boughs — they 
addressed  themselves  with  patient  labor  to  grub  out  the 
clinging  and  tangled  I'oots  of  error,  each  fibre  of  which 
was  instinct  with  an  evil  life.  How  thorough  and  suc- 
cessful their  labors  were,  our  Liturgy  is  the  witness. 
They  have  removed  every  expression  which  appears  to 
imply  a  presence  of  Christ's  body  in  the  elements,  or 
any  presence  of  that  body  in  the  Sacrament  other  than 
a  presence  to  the  faith  of  the  recipient.  They  have 
removed  every  expression  which  might  be  worried  into 
a  leluctant  witness  that  the  doctriiJe  of  the  offering  up  of 
the  elements,  or  the  performance  of  the  whole  service, '' 

'^  Bishop  Hopkins  (Third  Letter)  has  shown,  that  when  we 
speak  of  the  Sacrament  as  consisting  of  both  the  outward  sign 
and  itivvard  grace,  wc  may  speak  of  Christ's  real  presence  in  the 
Sacrament,  that  is,  his  presence  to  the  hearts  of  the  faithful.  In 
this  sense  it  was  that  Cranmer  professed  his  behef  in  the  presence 
of  Christ  at  the  Sacrament.     "  When  I  used  to  speak  sometimes 


THE   lord's   supter.  205 

was  a  sacrifice  propitiatory  or  impetratory  for  the  sins  of 
the  Hving,  or  refreshing  to  the  spirits  of  the  departed. 
There  is  no  commemoration  of,  or  prayer  for  the  dead. 
The  Romish  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist  is  not  there  either 
in  its  development  or  its  principle.  " 

as  tlm  old  authors  do,  that  Christ  is  in  the  SacraiK'nrs,  F  mean  ilic 
same  as  they  did  understand  the  matter;  that  js.  not  of  Christ's 
carnal  presence  in  the  outward  Sacrament,  but  ~:'>anjlimi;s  of  his 
sacramental  presence;  and  sumetimes  by  this  wnd  Sacrament,  I 
mean  the  whole  administration  and  receiving  of  the  Sacranienls  either 
of  Baptism  or  of  the  Lord's  Supper.  And  so  the  nU{  writers  tnany 
times  do  s;iy  that  Christ  ani  the  Holy  Ghost  be  nrr'sent  in  the 
Sacraments,  not  meaning;  by  that  manner  of  speecli  that  Christ  and 
the  Holy  Ghost  be  present  in  the  water,  bread,  ami  winr,  (whicli 
be  only  the  outward  visible  Sacraments,)  but  in  I'n;  due  ministraj 
lion  of  the  Sacraments,  according  to  Christ's  ordniance  and  insti- 
tution, Christ  and  his  Holy  Spirit  be  truly  and  imli^ed  present  by 
this  mighty  and  sanctifying  power,  virtue,  and  grace,  in  all  them 
THAT  WORTHILY  RECEIVE  THE  SAME.''  What  is  here  Said  of  the 
presence  of  Christ  may  be  applied  also  to  the  sacrifice  of  the  Eu- 
charist. We  have  shown  that  the  tvhole  ministration  of  the  Sacra- 
ment,-^the  offering  of  alms  and  prayers,  and  the  gifts  of  bread  and 
wine,  and  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper, — i*callod  a  sacrifice, 
but  it  ia  a  sacrifice  of  praise  and  thanksgiving. 

The  above  extract  from  Cranmer  is  exceedingly  valuable,  as 
showing  in  the  preface  to  his  book  on  the  Sacramen'.,  what  is  liis 
meaning  throughout.  The  next  chapter  contains  exiracts  frmm  the 
book  itself,  which  confirms  the  view  which  he  here  ex|)res3es. 

'■*  It  niust  be  confessed,  however,  that  the  Church  services  have 
several  times  narrowly  escaped  the  re-introduction  into  them  of  a 
semi-popish  system.  At  the  time  of  Laud,  and  at  the  revision  of 
166'2,  when  the  Nation  and  the  Church  were  at  the  most  distant  point 
of  re-action  from  the  Puritans,  it  would  seem  to  h.ivu  been  inevita- 
ble, thai  such  modifications  of  the  services  would  have  been  made,  as 
would  have  given  them  a  liigh    and  non-juring  tone  of  doctrine. 


206  THE  lord's  supper. 

It  will   be  observed,  that  hitherto  we  have  made  but 
slight   allusion   to  the  terms  Priest   and  Altar,  and  the 

Cardwell  shows  in  his  Conferences  how  nearly  such  a  result  was  ac- 
complished.    (Conferences,  389,  91.) 

"The  fear,  which  the  Commons  seem  to  have  contracted,  that 
occasion  would  be  taken  for  introducing  into  the  Liturgy  the  re- 
ligious sentiments  of  Archbishop  Laud  and  his  school  of  theolo- 
gians, was  not  altogether  without  foundation.  It  might,  in  the  first 
instance,  have  been  suggested  by  the  remembrance  of  what  was 
done  in  the  reign  of  King  Chai'les  I,  when,  under  the  directions  of 
the  Archbishop  and  Bishop  Wren,  the  Liturgy  was  revised  for  the 
use  of  the  Episcopal  Church  of  Scotland.  But  it  had  stronger 
grounds  to  support  it.  There  is  still  in  existence  a  copy  of  the 
edition  of  1634,  with  a  great  number  of  corrections  in  manuscript, 
prepared  for  this  convocation,  and  carrying  so  much  the  appearance 
of  completeness  and  authority,  as  to  contain  minute  instruction  for 
the  printer.  The  corrections  are  all  of  them  in  the  hand  of  Mr- 
Bancroft,  who  was  at  that  time  chaplain  to  the  Bishop  of  Durham, 
[Cosln,]  and  was  soon  after  appointed  by  the  convocation  to  super, 
intend  the  Prayer-Book  in  its  progress  through  the  press.  The  copy 
itself,  it  may  fairly  be  presumed,  was  drawn  up  by  Mr.  Sancroft, 
under  the  directions  of  Bishops  Cosin  and  Wren,  and  was  produced 
in  the  convocation  of  the  21st  of  November,  when  the  (lominittee, 
of  which  these  Bishops  were  leading  members,  seem  to  have  re- 
ported that  the  preparations  were  already  made,  and  that  the  whole 
house  might  immediately  proceed  to  the  work  of  rrvision.  How- 
ever this  may  be,  the  corrections  contain,  logeilier  with  many  ini- 
portant  impirnvcments,  s/rong  indications  of  such  sentiments  rpsperlin;; 
the  real,  presence  in  the  Eiichti}ist,  and  praijers  for  the  dead,  as  were  en- 
tertained by  the  Bishops  above  mentioned,  and  became  afterioard  the  dis- 
tinguishing creed  of  the  non-juring  clergy.  Doubtless  the  Liturgy  for 
Scotland  was  before  them  when  they  made  their  corrections  in  the 
English  service.  It  is  clear  that  they  were  indebted  to  it  in  several 
of  their  alterations;  although  they  have  constantly  improved  upon  it, 


THE  lord's  supper.  207 

erroneous  doctrine  connected  with,  and  fostered  by  their 
free  and  unexplained  use.  We  have  felt  it  the  less 
necessary  from  the  conviction  that  if  the  doctrine  of  a 
real,  in  the  sense  of  corporeal,  presence,  either  in  the 
elements  or  in  the  communicants,  and  that  of  a  sacrifice 
available  to  atone  for  sin,  or  avert  wrath,  or  benefit  the 
living  and  the  dead,  were  proved  to  be  ungrounded,  the 
connected  errors  of  a  sacrificing  Priesthood  and  an  Altar 
of  propitiation  and  atonement  would  fall  with  them. 
As  the  attempt,  however,  has  sometimes  been  made,  by 
confounding  the  functions  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian 
Priesthood,  to  fix  upon  the  latter  a  character  which 
made  a  sacrifice  necessarily  connected  with  his  office,  it 
will  be  proper  to  devote  a  few  pages  to  the  consideration 
of  the  office  and  function  of  the  Gospel  Priest. 

in  some  instances  taking  a  higher,  and  in  others  a  more  subdued 
tone  of  doctrine." 

Something,  but  not  much,  of  tliis  upward  tendency  appeared  in 
the  services  as  actually  revised.  How  much  would  have  been  in- 
serted but  for  the  watchfulness  of  those  who  were  yet  true  to  the 
Protestantism  of  the  Church,  appears  from  the  following  fact,  men- 
tioned by  Cardweil:     (Conferences,  p.  289,  note.) 

It  IS  worthy  of  notice  that  in  the  form  of  prayer  for  the  30th  of 
January,  which  was  put  fTth  in  the  preceding  year,  (1661,) 
by  royal  authority,  these  words  appear  in  one  of  the  Collects, 
hut  were  erased  by  the  Convocation  when  the  service  was  afterwards 
revised  and  annexed  to  the  Liturgy:  "  We  beseech  thee  to  give  ns 
all  grace  to  remember  and  provide  for  our  laiter  end,  by  a  careful 
f^udious  imitation  of  this  thy  blessed  saint  and  martyr,  and  al!  other 
thy  saints  and  martyrs  that  have  gone  before  us,  that  we  may  be 
made  worthy  to  receive  benefit  by  their  prayers,  which  they,  in  com- 
munion with  thy  Church  Catholic,  offer  up  to  thee  for  that  part  of  it 
here  militant,  and  yet  in  fight  with  and  danger  from  the  flesh." 


208  THE  lord's  supper. 

The  ambiguity  and  lliictuation  of  language  has  on  this, 
a-^  on  so  many  other  subjects,  caused  much  confusion. 
The  word  Priest  is  used,  sometimes  in  a  more  general 
and  sometimes  in  a  more  specific  sense.  Attention  to 
this  circumstance  will  tend  to  clear  up  the  subject  to  our 
minds. 

Under  every  dispensation,  God  has  employed  and  em- 
powered some  men  on  his  behalf  to  speak  in  his  name, 
and  make  known  his  message  to  the  world,  and  to  offer 
up,  in  the  name  of  the  people,  their  sacrifices,  prayers, 
prai'^es  and  thanksgivings.      At  first,  the  head  of  every 
family  discliarged  this   office.     This  was  the  arrange- 
ment until  the  establishment  of  the  Jewish  dispensation. 
Then   the   tribe   of  Levi  was  set  apart  for  the  sacred 
office   of  ministering  to  men   on  behalf  of  God,  and  of 
offering  homage  and   sacrifice  and  prayer  to  God  on  be- 
half of    man.      When   Christ   came,    the   office   of  this 
class  of  commissioned   agents  for  God  ceased.      A  third 
class  of  divinely  commissioned  Ministers,  not  belonging 
to  the   tribe  of  Levi,  were  then   sent  forth,  with  power 
to    perpetuate   their    succession    as   the    servants    and 
messengers   of  God   to   the   people.     All  these   classes 
agreed  in  this,  that  they  were  agents  and  messengers  of 
God  to  men.     They  differed,  however,  in   the  mode   of 
dischai'ging  that  agency,  as   they  stood   before   or  after 
Christ.      The  first  two  classes,  being  both  before  Christ, 
ag  eed    (■-.scntialiy   in  the   mode  of   their  ministration, 
and  differed   chieHy  in  the  facts  that  the  first  class  con- 
sisted of  all  tlie   heads   of  families,  whereas   the   latter 
were  taken  from   a  single  tribe,  and   that  the   duties  of 
the  latter  were  prescribed  with  minute  particularity  in 


THE    LORD'S    SUPPER. 


209 


a  divinely  revealed  and  divinely  obligatory  ritual  of 
service;  whereas  no  such  minute  directions  were  given 
to  the  former. 

The  Ministers  of  God,  after  Christ,  differed  in  the 
mode  of  their  ministration  from  those  who  were  before 
him.  Not  thai  they  had  nothing  in  common  even  in  the 
modes  of  their  ministration,  but  that  the  prominent 
features  of  those  modes  were  diverse.  They  both,  for 
instance,  "taught  the  people"  God's  Word.  But  the 
prominent  work  of  the  Jewish  Minister  of  God  was, 
that  he  should  offer  up,  and  be  occupied  with  the  services 
connected  with  the  offering  up  of,  a  sacrifice  to  God  for 
the  sins  of  the  people.  He  presented  constant  sacrifices 
for  the  expiation  of  the  violation  of  the  ceremonial  law, 
and  for  the  remission,  in  some  cases,  of  the  penalties 
annexed  to  the  violation  of  the  moral  law.  The  promi- 
nent work  of  the  latter  was  to  preach  and  teach  "the 
Gospel  of  the  kingdom."  The  one  was  to  set  forth  a 
coming  Saviour,  and  the  salvation  which  he  was  to  bring, 
by  outward  and  typical  signs,  sacrifices,  and  ceremonies. 
His  chief  work  was  to  offer  sacrifice.  The  other  was 
to  show  forth,  hy  proclaiming,  a  Saviour,  who  had  come 
and  gone.  His  chief  work  was  to  preach.  The  one 
was  to  teach  chiefly  by  the  outward  action  of  sacrifice; 
the  other  chiefly  by  word.  Now,  as  the  mode  of  minis- 
tration on  the  part  of  these  two  classes  of  God's  com- 
missioned agents  was  different,  so  were  their  titles. 
The  one  class  were  called  Priests.  The  other  were 
called  Ambassadors,  Apostles,  Heralds,  Elders,  Pro- 
phets, Evangelists,  Teachers,  all  words  expressive  of 
proclaiming  and  teaching.    Alike  in  this,  that  they  were 


210  THE    lord's    supper. 

both  commissioned  agents  on  the  part  of  God  to  treat 
with  man,  they  differed  in  this,  that  the  chief  function 
of  the  one  was  to  offer  up  sacrifices,  and  of  the  other 
to  present,  in  teaching,  the  great  truth  which  was  glad 
tidings  alike  to  Jew  and  Gentile. 

To  sacrifice,  then,  is  peculiar  to  a  Priesthood,  except 
when  the  term  is  used  in  a  figurative  sense;  and  to 
preach  and  administer  the  Sacraments  (a  more  impres- 
sive preaching)  is  peculiar  to  the  Gospel  Ambassador- 
ship. '•' 

'^The  gz'eat  Lord  Bacon,  whose  mind  embraced  all  sciences,  and 
detected  the  sources  of  error  with  wonderful  acuteness,  has  thus 
given  his  opinion  upon  the  use  of  the  word  Priest:  "That  the  word 
Priest  should  not  be  continued,  especially  with  offence,  the  word 
Minister  being  already  made  familiar.  This  may  he  said,  that  it  is 
a  good  rule,  in  translation,  never  to  confound  that  in  one  word  in 
the  translation,  which  is  precisely  distinguished  in  two  words  in  the 
original,  for  doubt  of  equivocation  and  traducing.  And,  therefore, 
seing  the  word  aperi()vt£{>oi  and  Ispsvi  be  always  distinguished  in 
the  original,  and  the  one  used  for  a  sacrificer,  luid  the  other  for  a 
Minister;  the  word  Priest  being  made  common  to  both,  whatsoever 
the  derivation  be,  yet  in  use  it  confoundeth  the  Minister  with  the 
sacrificer." 

Lord  Bacon's  Work's,  vol.  ii,  p.  426. 

The  essence  of  the  Priesthood  has  been  defined  by  one  as  a  "minis- 
terial intervention  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins,"  and  by  another,  as  a 
"ministerial  intervention  for  the  salvation  of  man. "  The  former  is  an 
imperfect  and  the  latter  a  complete  definition,  it  seems  to  us,  of  the 
essence,  not  of  Priesthood,  but  of  all  ministerial  agency  on  the  part 
of  those  who  are  commissioned  by  God  to  convey  ta  man  the  terms 
and  method  of  pardon  and  salvation.  Of  this  commissioned  agency, 
whose  character  is  ministerial  intervention  for  the  forgiveness  of  sin 
and  the   salvation  of  man,  Priesthood  is  one  species,  Ambassador- 


THE    lord's    supper.  '211 

It  would  lead  us  much  too  far  should  we  entei  into 
detailed  proof  of  these  positions.  Let  it  sulTice  to  call 
the  reader's  attention  to  two  facts  which  speak  a  clear 
and  loud  testimony  on  this  subject.  The  first  is  the 
fact  that  when  Christ  first  sent  the  -postles  lorth,  it 
was  with  the  injunction,  "And  as  ye  go,  preach.,  say- 
ing, The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand  ;"  and  when  he 
gave  to  them  their  final  commission,  it  was  that  they 
should  go  and  teach  all  nations,  bai)tiziag  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.     The  other 

ship  is  another.  To  sacrifice  is  the  peculiar  and  prominent  duly  of 
the  one;  to  preach,  the  prominent  function  of  the  other. 

In  confirmation  of  the  second  definition  of  Priesthood,  that  its 
essence  is  intervention  for  man's  saltation,  it  seems  to  us  not  by 
auy  mean.s  conckt.sivc  to  quote  tlie  passage  in  Hebrews,  (v.  1.)  that 
a  "Priest  is  ordained  for  men  in  thingspertaining  to  God."  This  Uin- 
guage  occurs  in  a  description  of  the  office  of  the  Jcwisli  Priest- 
hood, and  is  spoken  of  the  High  Priest.  It  is  not  used  in  reference 
to  wliat  is  specially  characteristic  of  Priesthood  as  such,  but  of 
what  is  applicable  indeed  to  the  Jewish  Priesthood,  but  to  that  in 
common  with  every  other  species  of  commissioned  agency  for  man 
from  God.  For  if  we  limit  its  application  to  the  High  Priest  of 
whom  it  is  spoken,  then  it  excludes  the  Christian  Mmistry  from 
this  character,  an  exclusion  not  intended  by  the  author  who  has 
quoted  the  passage.* 

It  seems  to  us  that  much  confusion  on  this  subject  has  arisen  from 
assuming  that  every  cominissioned  agency  from  God  is  a  Priesthood 
— that  such  is  the  generic  name  which  belongs  to  such  a  commission 
— and  then  gathering  the  functions  which  were  peculiar  to  one  class 
of  Ministers  for  God,  the  Jewish,  and  transferring  them  over  to 
another  class,  the  Christian.  Each  has  its  appropriate  character 
and  office.     The  one  was  abolished  when  the  other  was  introduced. 

*Two  Lectures  on  tJ»c  terms,  Priest,  Altar  and  Sacrifice.    Balitinore,  1843. 


212 


THE    LORD'S    SUPPER. 


fact,  still  more  remarkable,  is,  that  the  Apostles  and 
those  whom  they  commissioned,  are  7j^er  called  Priests 
in  the  New.  Testament.  When  we  recollect  that  these 
Apostles  were  all  Jews,  we  can  find  the  explanation  of 
this  remarkable  fact  only  in  ihe  supposition  that  they 
were  divinely  restrained  by  the  Spirit,  from  the  use  of  a 
term  to  which  they  were  so  much  accustomed,  but 
which  designated  a  Ministry  which  had  passed  away. 
It  appears  surprising,  inasmuch  as  they  had  known  no 
Ministry  of  God,  but  that  of  a  Priesthood,  that  they 
should  never  have  used,  even  by  way  of  accommoda- 
tion, the  term  appropriated  to  the  Ministry  under  one 
dispensation,  to  designate  them  under  another.  And 
what  adds  to  the  significant  singularity  of  this  fact  is, 
that  in  the  single  instance"'  in  which  the  word  Priest- 
hood occurs  in  an  accommodated  or  figurative  sense,  it 
is  used  with  reference  not  to  the  Ministry,  but  to  the 
taithful  disciples  of  the  Saviour. 

Such  being  the  facts  with  regard  to  the  word  of  God, 
we  turn  to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  There  we 
find  the  word  Priest  freely  used.  It  is  acknowledged 
by  all,  that,  in  a  majority  of  cases,  it  is  used  as  an  ab- 
breviation for  the  word  Presbyter,  the  second  of  the 
three  divinely  constituted  orders  of  the  sacred  Ministry. 
But,  in  other  cases,  it  has  been  contended  that  it  has 
another  sense,  as  descriptive  of  a  function  which  can 
only  be  expressed  by  the  word  priestly,  as  contradis- 
tinguished from  the  function  appropriate  to  the  Presby- 
ter, as  the  second  order  of  the  Ministry.     Now,  if  by 

'«JPeteriii5,  9. 


THE  lord's  supper.  213 

this  it  were  meant  that  in  our  Prayer-Book  the  word 
Priest  and  Priesthood  were  sometimes  used  to  desig- 
nate that  general  Ministry  in  behalf  of  God,  which 
Priests  under  the  law,  and  Presbyters  under  the  Gospel, 
alike  discharge  ;  or  that  these  words  were  figuratively 
employed  to  describe  the  duties  of  the  Ministry  under 
the  Gospel  by  those  under  the  law,  we  should  not  be 
anxious  to  controvert  such  a  position.  This  extended 
and  figurative  use  of  a  word,  originally  api)lied  with  a 
narroM-er  meaning,  is  common  in  all  speech,  human  and 
inspired.  We  do  not  believe,  however,  that  even  such  a 
use  of  the  term  is  to  be  found  in  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer.  We  are  fully  persuaded  that  wherever  the 
term  occurs,  it  has  reference  to  the  second  order  of  the 
Ministry,  and  to  the  functions  appropriate  to  that  order 
as  contradistinguished  from  that  of  the  Diaconate. 
That  it  is  used  in  the  Prayer  Book  to  designate  any 
function  which  is  not  appropriate  and  peculiar  to  the 
Presbyter ;  that  it  is  used  in  such  an  extended  mean- 
ing as  to  take  in  any  of  the  functions  peculiar  to  the 
Jewish  Priesthood,  as  a  specific  Priesthood,  we  do  not 
grant. 

"  The  rubric  before  the  forms  of  Absolution,  and  the 
larger  Benediction,  and  the  Office  for  the  administration 
of  the  Holy  Communion,  and  that  of  the  Institution  of 
Ministers  into  Churches,"  have  been  adduced  as  in- 
stances in  which  the  word  Priest  is  used  with  reference 
not  to  the  functions  which  are  appropriate  to  the  Pres- 
byter, but  in  reference  to  what  may  be  rightfully  con- 
sidered ^'priestly  acts,"  or  "sacerdotal  functions." 

We  have  already  shown  that  the  word  Minister  stood 


214  THE  lord's  supper. 

in  the  rubric  before  the  form  of  Absolution,  and  that  its 
change  to  the  word  Priest,  however  it  may  have  oc- 
curred, was  unauthorized.  Tliis  shows,  even  at  a  time 
when  the  minds  of  our  Reformers  had  not  become  fully 
emancipated  from  the  prejudices  of  their  Romish  educa- 
tion, that  they  did  not  regard  the  declaration  of  Absolu- 
tion as  a  priestly  act,  and  that  they  did  regard  it  as  a 
ministerial  act.  It  may  have  been  innocently  intro- 
duced, with  the  intention  of  m5,king  a  distinction  be- 
tween the  Exhortation  and  Confession,  which  might  be 
said  by  a  Deacon,  and  the  solemn  form  of  declarative 
Absolution,  which,  on  account  of  the  lower  office  of  a 
Deacon,  there  was  a  propriety  in  confining  to  the  Pres- 
byter. 

The  larger  Benediction  is  to  be  pronounced  by  the 
Priest,  or  Bishop,  if  he  be  present.  This  has  been 
supposed  to  be  an  act  not  appropriate  to  the  Presbyter 
as  such,  or  to  the  Bishop  as  such,  but  of  another  kind, 
belonging  to  each  in  a  higher  or  different  character,  and 
partaking  of  the  characteristics  which  were  peculiar  to 
the  Priesthood.  It  is  obvious  to  remark,  in  reply  to 
this,  that  a  Bishop  does  not  cease  to  be  a  Presbyter, 
and  to  perform  all  the  functions  peculiar  to  that  office, 
because,  in  his  character  of  Bishop,  he  has  other  powers 
conferred  upon  him.'' 

In  the  Institution  Office,  it  must  be  granted  that  the 
word  Priest  is  used  in  many  instances  as  synonymous 
with  the  word  Presbyter.     The  Institutor,  for  instance, 

"  "The  Elders  among  you  1  exhort,  who  am  also  an  Eldtr,'"  says 
St.  Peter  tlie  Apostle.  (1  Peter  v,  1.) 


THE  lord's  supper.  215 

is  sometimes  called  Presbyter,  and  sometimes  Priest. 
But  inasmuch  as  the  terms,  "sacerdotal  function,"  and 
"  sacerdotal  relation,"  occur  in  this  service,  they  have 
been  supposed  to  designate  an  act  of  a  specifically 
priestly  character.  We  have  expressed  the  belief  that 
the  word  Priest  is  never  used,  even  in  an  extended  or 
figurative  sense,  as  descriptive  of  the  Gospel  Ministry. 
Here,  however,  the  words  sacerdotal  function — terms 
synonymous  Wiih  priestly  function,  in  the  Jew'rsh  sense 
— must  be  used  either  in  a  figurative,  or  literal  sense. 
If  it  be  used  in  a  literal  sense,  then  our  interpretation 
of  this  whole  subject  has  been  wrong.  Then  the  Min- 
istry of  the  New  Testament,  according  to  our  Prayer- 
Book,  is  a  Priesthood  in  another  sense  than  that  of 
being  a  Presbytership.  How  else  shall  we  decide  this 
point,  than  by  examining  what  the  service  specifies  as 
belonging  to  what  is  here  called  a  ^''  sacerdotal  func- 
tion r^ 

We  venture  to  say  that  there  is  not  a  syllable  in  the 
enumeration  of  the  functions  thus  designated,  which 
extends  them  beyond  what  is  either  appropriate  to  the 
Presbyter,  or  common  to  every  Minister  of  God;  not  a 
word  which  expresses  any  thing  peculiar  to  that  specific 
kind  of  ministration  which  belongs  to  a  Priesthood.  He 
is  "to  feed  the  flock;"  he  is  "to  dispense  the  Word,  to 
lead  the  devotions  of  the  people,  (not  make  offerings /or 
them,)  to  exercise  discipline,  and  to  be  a  pattern  to  the 
flock  committed  to  his  care."  That  it  is  only  in  a  figur- 
ative or  accommodated  sense  that  this  term  is  employed, 
is  evident  from  this  enumeration  of  what  is  included  in 
the  sacerdotal  function,  and  also  from  the  second  Collect 


216  THE  lord's  supper. 

after  the  anthem,  in  which  the  Ministers  of  Apostolic 
succession  are  mentioned  in  connection  with  the  offering 
up  of  the  sacrifice  of  prayer  and  praise.  If  the  sacrifice 
were  other  than  figurative,  the  ministry  would  have 
been  called  an  Apostolic  Priesthood.  Conversely,  if  the 
sacerdotal  function  mentioned  had  been  used  in  other 
than  a  figurative  or  accommodated  sense,  the  duties 
specified  as  belonging  to  that  function  would  have  been 
other  and  more  than  those  which  belong  to  the  Presbyter. 
With  regard  to  the  use  of  the  word  Priest,  in  the 
Communion  Office,  it  is  sufficient  to  refer  to  what  has 
been  said  upon  the  subject  of  a  sacrifice,  and  without 
which  there  can  be  no  Priest.  That  the  celebration  of 
the  Holy  Communion  should  be  limited  to  Presbyters 
and  Bishops,  is  in  accordance  with  its  Scriptural  insti- 
tution and  Scriptural  usage. 

The  word  Altar  has  been  shown  to  have  been  ban- 
ished from  the  Communion  Service  altogether,  and, 
therefore,  does  not,  on  this  occasion,  call  for  more  ex- 
tended examination.  Our  church  has  not  sanctioned, 
but  has  set  the  seal  of  her  disapprobation  on  its  use,  in 
any  sense,  in  connection  with  the  Communion  Service. 
The  injunction  of  Bishop  Ridley  was,  that  "the  Lord's 
board  should  be  after  the  manner  of  an  honest  board, 
and  not  of  an  altar,  that  the  simple  may  be  turned  from 
the  old  superstitious  opinions  of  the  Popish  Mass,  and 
to  the  right  use  of  the  Lord's  Supper."  The  use  of  the 
word  in  the  Institution  Office  is  too  manifestly  an  ac- 
commodated one,  to  call  for  remark. 

The  two  doctrines  of  the  Eucharist  which  we  have 
presented  in  this  chapter  are  essentially  diverse.    They 


THE  lord's  supper.  217 

proceed  on  different  views  of  the  nature  of  the  Gospel, 
of  the  office  of  the  Ministry,  and  the  design  of  the  Sac- 
raments. The  one  regards  the  Gospfel  as  a  system  of 
TRUTH,  which,  by  means  of  the  written  and  preached 
Word  and  the  Ordinances,  the  Spirit  takes,  presents  to, 
fixes  upon,  and  burris  into  the  very  substance  of  the 
soul.  By  this  it  is  convicted,  converted,  and  sanctified. 
The  other  does  not  regard  the  truth  of  Scripture  as  the 
chief  instrument  of  the  Spirit  in  its  work  upon  the 
human  soul,  but  supposes  the  Sacraments  to  be  filled 
and  instinct  with  grace,  residing  in  them  by  God's  ap' 
pointment,  and  conveyed  to  the  souls  of  those  who 
receive  them  from  the  hands  of  the  divinely  commis- 
sioned administrators.  The  one  regards  the  Ministry 
as  the  dispenser  of  the  Word  of  Life,  in  preaching  and 
in  Sacraments.  The  other  regards  it  as  a  vehicle  of 
grace,  connecting  on  to  an  unbroken  succession  of  such, 
from  the  time  of  Christ,  the  primal  source  of  grace,  by 
which  the  Sacraments,  else  forms  void  of  life,  become 
sources  of  spiritual  influence.  The  one  regards  the  Sac- 
raments as  signs  of  grace  and  seals  of  covenanting 
mercy,  the  right  reception  of  which  secures  directly 
from  God  the  full  blessing  which  they  guarantee,  an^ 
the  full  grace  they  signify.  The  other  regards  them, 
when  administered  by  the  divinely  commissioned  Min- 
istry, as  that  in  which  grace  irtfheres,  and  from  which  it 
is  derived  to  the  hearts  of  the  recipients.  The  one 
brings  the  heart  directly  to  God  as  the  source  of  grace; 
the  other  interposes  the  Sacraments  which  hold  gathered 
grace  for  all,  whence  it  is  distributed  to  each  by  the 
commissioned  dispensers  of  the  same. 
10 


218  THE   tOkS's   StipPES.- 

These  varying  views  of  the  very  nature  of  the  Gospel, 
the  design  of  the  Ministry  and  office  of  the  Sacraments, 
branch  off  into  widely  different  developments  of  the 
intent  of  each  Sacrament,  and  the  meaning  of  its  details. 
The  error  of  regarding  Sacraments,  not  as  institutions 
on  God's  part,  by  which  he  testifies  of  promised  grace 
on  conditions,  and  as  acts  on  our  part  by  which  we 
signify  our  grateful  reception  of  such  promised  grace  by 
the  fulfilment  of  the  conditions  specified,  and  which, 
when  thus  received,  are  the  occasions  and  instruments 
of  bringing  the  soul  to  God,  to  receive  immediately  from 
him,  and  not  from  them,  spiritual  gifts  and  graces;  but 
rather  as  the  reservoir  of  grace  interposed  between  the 
fountain  head  and  them,  whence  each  is  to  derive  it  to 
his  own  soul; — this  is  the  ei-ror  which  is  germinant  of 
sensual  views,  which  rob  the  soul  of  its  spiritual  portion. 
From  supposing  the  grace  to  be  fixed  in  the  Sacrament; 
from  regarding  "the  cup  as  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost," 
and  the  bread  as  holding  divine  influence  within  itself, 
the  transition  is  not  difficult  to  the  grosser  view  of  the 
bodily  presence  in  the  elements — the  presence  of  a  body, 
natuial  or  spiritual,  but  still  of  a  real  body,  as  contradis- 
tinguished from  a  body  present  only  by  sacrament  and 
symbol.  Rome  stands  Ibrth  as  an  example  of  the  fruit 
of  such  teaching,  if  we  would  not  reap  her  harvest, 
we  must  not  sow  her  seed  ! 


X. 


(illjc  Corii'a  Supper. 


CONCLUDED. 


III.  What  degree  of  importance  should  be  attached 
to  the  teachings  of  Cranmer  and  Ridley,  and  the  Re- 
formers who  were  associated  with  them,  as  individual 
doctors  of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ,  in  our  search 
after  the  true  interpretation  of  the  Word  of  God,  is  a 
question  upon  which  there  may  be  great  differences  of 
opinion.  It  would  seem,,  however,  that  there  could  be 
but  one  sentiment  as  to  the  decisive  weight  of  their 
testimony,  when  we  inquire  after  the  meaning  of  those 
articles  and  otiices  which  they  themselves  composed. 
Had  there  been,  in  the  circumstances  in  which  they 
were  placed,  any  controlling  influences  which  would 
have  compelled  or  induced  them  permanently  to  have 
embodied  in  the  formularies  and  offices  of  the  English 
Church,  sentiments  repugnant  to  their  own,  there  might 
be  some  reason  to  look  with  suspicion  upon  their  indi- 
vidual writings  as  the  true  key  to  the  interpretation  of 
the  public  services  which  they  framed.  But  when  those 
services  were  revised  and  shaped  into  their  present 
form,  there   were  no  such  influences.     Cranmer  and 


^^0  THE    lord's    supper. 

Ridley,  and  their  associates,  had  the  management  of 
ecclesiastical  affairs  in  their  own  hands.  They  were  no 
longer  overawed  by  the  stern  and  peremptory  tyrant, 
Henry.  They  were  the  guides  of  the  pious  and  tho- 
roughly Protestant  boy,  King  Edward.  They  were  at 
perfect  Hberty  to  introduce  into  the  Liturgy  every  truth 
which  they  believed  to  be  of  God,  from  the  least  im- 
portant to  the  most  fundamental.'     While  they  so  con- 

'  That  there  were  those  among  the  commissioners  appointed  to 
examine  and  amend  the  offices  of  the  Church,  who  were  opposed  to 
the  views  of  Cranmer  and  Ridley,  there  is  no  doubt.  (Burnet,  ii, 
99.)  That  the  Archbishop,  from  prudential  considerations,  ab- 
stained from  making,  in  the  first  book  of  Edward,  the  complete 
change  in  the  Communion  Service  which  he  contemplated,  is  also 
highly  probable.  If  so,  it  is  an  evidence  of  his  moderation  and 
wisdom.  The  discussions  at  Cambridge  and  elsewhere,  which  were 
held  between  the  formation  of  the  service  and  its  revision,  enlight- 
ened and  prepared  ihe  public  mind  to  receive  the  service  purged  of 
all  Romish  corruptions.  That  Cranmer  had  a  controlling  influence 
on  both  occasions  is  perfectly  evident.  Palmer  (on  the  Church, 
vol.  i,  465.-91)  speaks  as  if  the  doctrinal  views  of  the  standards  of 
Henry  VIII  were  continued  on  unmodified  during  the  reign  of 
Edward,  and  that  whatever  Cranmer  may  have  written  as  "a  private 
theologian,"  has  no  decisive  weight  in  ascertaining  the  doctrme  of 
the  Church  of  England.  The  attempt  to  deny  or  disguise  Cranmer's 
controlling  influence  in  modeling  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  to  make  it  appear  that  the  doctrinal  standards  of  the 
Church  remained  unchanged  under  Edward  as  they  were  under 
Henry,  is  one  of  the  hardiest  experiments  on  the  presumed  igno- 
rance of  his  readers,  of  which  we  have  ever  known  a  respectable 
author  guilty.  Says  Le  Bas,  (Life  of  Cranmer,  vol.  i,  256,)  "To 
assign  to  every  individual  engaged  his  proper  share  in  this  glorious 
performance,  (the  Liturgy,)  would  be  an  impossible  attempt ;  but 
it  has  never  been  doubted,  that  Cranmer  loas  the  life  and  soul  of  the  ttn- 


THE  lord's  supper.  221 

structed  the  formularies  as  to  give  them,  in  matters 
unessential,  that  comprehensiveness  which  is  indispen- 
sable in  standards  intended  for  a  national  Church,  they 
admitted  nothing  which  they  believed  to  be  contrary  to 
the  Word  of  God.  When  we  recollect  that  the  greater 
part  of  their  writings  which  remain,  were  composed 
expressly  to  defend  or  explain  the  doctrines  of  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  we  surely  are  authorized  in  resort- 
ing to  them  for  the  purpose  of  explaining  the  meaning 
of  its  articles  and  oiHces.  If  the  fathers  of  the  Church 
are  regarded  as  the  best  interpreters  of  the  meaning  of 
the  Scriptures,  because,  being  nearest  to  them  in  time, 
they  are  most  likely  to  have  known  the  mind  of  the 
sacred  writers,  we  may  at  least  grant  to  the  fathers  of 
the  Reformation,  that  they  are  the  best  interpreters  of 
their  own  productions,  being,  as  we  suppose,  best  ac- 
quainted with  their  own  mind  and  meaning. 

In  collecting  the  testimony  of  these  venerable  men, 


dertalcing ;  and  it  is  highly  probable  that  Ridley  and  Goodrich  were 
his  most  effective  auxiliaries,  and  that  Holbeach,  May,  Taylor, 
Haynes,  and  Cox,  a.l  of  them  men  of  distinguished  ability  and 
learning,  continued  throughout  to  aid  the  compilation."  This  refers 
to  the  first  Liturgy.  Strype  gives  the  same  testimony  with  regard 
to  the  second.  At  the  disputation  at  Oxford,  in  1554,  by  Cranmer, 
Ridley,  and  Latimer,  on  the  one  side,  and  Weston  and  other  Ro- 
manists on  the  other,  the  charge  was  made  by  Weston,  that  "a 
renegate  Scot  took  away  the  adoration  or  worshipping  of  Christ  in 
the  Sacrament."  Strype  remarks,  "but  there  was  no  Scot  that  ever 
I  could  read  or  hear  of  that  assisted  at  the  review  of  that  Commun- 
ion book.  And,  indeed,  Cranmer,  Ridley,  and  Cox  were  the  chief 
that  managed  that  affair,  though  they  consulted  with  Bucer  and  Peter 
Martyr."— MesjobiaJvS,  vol.  iii,  p.  jn. 


222  THE  lord's  supper. 

We  shall  select  sueh  passages,  chiefly,  as  have  reference 
to  the  real  presence  of  Christ  and  to  the  sacrifice  of  the 
Eucharist.  If  their  testimony  on  those  two  points  shall 
be  found  to  be  clear,  there  will  be  little  need  of  showing 
their  sense  of  the  Priesthood  and  the  Altar; — doctrines 
which  stand  or  fall  with  those  of  the  bodily  presence 
and  the  sacrifice. 

Cranmer  has  himself  inforrried  us  of  the  workings  of 
his  mind  on  this  subject.  "There  are  few  readers," 
says  Dr.  Wadsworth,^  "  who.  will  not  admire  the  sober 
and  pious  language  of  this  excellent  man,  on  occasion 
of  its  being  objected  to  him  by  Dr.  Richard  Smith,  that 
he  had  maintained  in  his  '  short  instruction  in  Christian 
religion.'  printed  in  1548,  the  doctrine  of  the  carnal 
presence.  After  denying  the  truth  of  Smith's  allega- 
tion, he  thus  proceeds:  'But  this  I  confess  of  myself, 
that  not  long  before  I  wrote  the  said  Catechism,  I  was 
in  that  error  of  the  real  presence,  as  I  was  many  years 
past,  in  divers  other  errors,  as  of  Transubstantiation,  * 
of  the  sacrifice  propitiatory  in  the  Mass,  and  many 
other  superstitions  and  errors  that  came  from  Rome,  being 
brought  up  from  my  youth  in  them,  and  nourished  in 
them  for  lack  of  good  instruction  in  my  youth;  the  out- 
rageous floods  of  papistical  errors  at  that  time  overflow- 
ing the  world.  For  which  and  other  mine  offences  in 
youth,  I  do  daily  pray  unto  God  for  mercy  and  pardon, 
saying,  '  Good  Lord,  remember  not  mine  ignorances 
and  offences  of  my  youth  !' 

^Ecclesiastical  Biography,  vol.  iii,  p.  186. 

^  Here  we  observe,  that  Cranmer  distinguishes  the  error  of  the 
yeal  presence  from  that  of  Transubstantiation,  and  disclaims  both. 


THE  lord's  supper.  228 

**  '  But  after  it  had  pleased  God  to  show  unto  me  by 
his  holy  Word  a  more  perfect  knowledge  of  his  Son 
Jesus  Christ,  from  time  to  time,  as  I  grew  in  knowledge 
of  him,  by  little  and  little  I  put  away  my  former  igno- 
rance. And  as  God  of  his  mercy  gave  me  light,  so, 
through  his  grace,  I  opened  my  eyes  to  receive  it,  and 
did  not  wilfully  repugn  unto  God  and  remain  in  dark- 
ness.' " 

The  work  in  which  this  change  of  view,  especially 
on  the  subject  then  most  discussed,  is  brought  forth,  is 
thus  described  by  Mr.  Le  Bas:  "The  first  part  con- 
tains an  exposition  of  the  true  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist, 
and  a  brief  enumeration  of  the  various  abuses  by 
which  it  had  been  corrupted.  The  second  part  is 
devoted  to  the  subject  of  Transubstantiation,  and  its 
object  is  to  show  that  the  notion  is  contradictory  to 
the  Word  of  God,  to  the  reason  and  senses  of  man,  and 
to  the  belief  of  the  ancient  fathers  of  the  Church.  The 
third  part  explains  the  meaning  of  the  assertion  that 
Christ  is  present  in  the  Holy  Supper;  and  its  object  is 
to  show  that  '  as  our  re-generation  in  Christ  by  Baptism 
is  sphitual,  even  so  our  eating  and  drinking  is  a  spiritual 
feeding;  which  kind  of  regeneration  and  feeding  re- 
quires no  real  and  corporeal  presence  of  Christ,  but  only 
his  presence  in  spirit,  grace,  and  effectual  operation.' "* 
This  description  of  an  impartial  historian,  confirmed  by 
an  extract  from  the  great  work  concerning  which  he 
writes,  is,  itself,  evidence  of  the  highest  kind  for  the 
position  which  we  aim  to  establish. 

♦  Le  Bas'B  Life  of  Cranmer ,  vol.  ii,  p.  50. 


224  THE  lord's  supper. 

Let  it  be  remarked,  that  while  Crannier  and  the  Re- 
formers rejected  Transubstantiation,  and  a  real  presence 
of  the  natural  body  and  blood,  or  of  the  glorified  spiritual 
body  °  of  Christ,  they  yet  spoke  without  hesitation  of 
his  body  and  blood  as  present  at  the  Sacrament,  and  as 
really  partaken  of  by  the  faithful  communicant.  '^  It 
excites  no  surprise  to  find  those  who  framed  our  service 
using  such  language,  since  we  find  it  also,  agreeably  to 
the  Scriptural  phraseology,  freely  adopted  in  our  Com- 
munion Office.  There  are  at  least  four  different  senses 
in  which  Christ's  presence  is  frequently  and  familiarly  ad- 
mitted. 1.  He  is  spoken  of  as  present,  because  he  is 
present  in  Sacrament  or  by  symbol.  Hence  the  bread 
and  Aj'ine  are  called  his  sacramental  body  and  blood; 
language  which  does  not  imply  that  it  is  a  new  kind  of 
body,  a  nameless,  tertium  ^Mirf  existence,  called  a  sacra- 
mental bod}-^,  but  that  it  is  a  body  only  sacramentally  or 
symbolically.  2.  Christ's  body  is  said  to  be  present  by 
its  "  grace"  or  "  virtue;"  that  is,  by  its  redeeming  and 
san^etifying  efficacy.  3.  Christ  is  said  to  be  present  in 
the  Sacrament,  as  a  whole  service,  in  the  sense  of  being- 
present  by  his  Spirit,  not  in  the  elements,  but  in  the 
hearts  of  the  believing  and  repenting  recipients.     These 

^  In  the  sense  of  St.  Paul,  1  Cor.  xv,  44,  where  he  speaks  of  the 
risen  body  as  a  spiritual  body. 

*  In  my  book  I  have  written  in  more  than  a  hundred  places  that 
we  receive  the  self-same  body  of  Christ  that  was  born  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  that  was  crucified  and  buried,  that  rose  again,  ascended  into 
heaven,  and  sitteth  at  the  right  hand  of  God  the  Father  Almighty; 
and  the  contention  is  only  in  the  manner  and  form  how  we  receive  it. 
CUANMEB  ON  THE  SaCBAMENT,  p.  370. 


THE  lord's  supper.  225 

two  latter  statements  are  substantially  the  same.  4. 
Christ's  body  is  described  as  being  present  to  the  be- 
liever, not  because  it  comes  down  with  a  local  or  non- 
local '  presence,  but  because  the  believer's  faith  ascends 
to  it  in  heaven,  and  feeds  on  it,  as  the  all  of  salvation 
and  of  life.  In  such  sense  was  the  expression,  "  lift  up 
your  hearts,"  and  the  answer,  "we  do  lift  them  up  to 
the  Lord,"  repeaU'dly  explained  both  by  the  fathers  and 
the  Reformers. 

VVe  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  whenever  the  Refor- 
mers speak  of  the  real  presence  of  Christ,  it  will  be 
found  that  one  of  these  senses  is  necessarily  imposed 
upon  the  expression  by  the  immediate  context,  or  by 
other  portions  of  their  writings. 

We  have  already  quoted  one  passage  from  Cranmer 
in  which  he  t  xpl•^^in^  what  his  own  meaning  is  through- 
out his  work  on  the  Sacrament.  Here  is  another,  con- 
sisting of  a  part  of  his  examination  before  the  commis- 
sioners at  Oxford. 

"  Now,  as  concerning  the  Sacrament,  I  have  taught  no 
false  doctrine  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar;  for  if  it 
can  be  proved  by  any  doctor  above  a  thousand  years 
after  Christ,  that  f'hrist'sbody  is  there  really,  I  will  give 
over.  My  book  was  made  seven  years  ago,  and  no 
man  hath  brought  any  answer  against  it.  I  believe  that 
he  who  soeateth  and  drinketh  that  Sacrament,  Christ  is 
within  him, — whole  Christ,  his  nativity,  passion,  resur- 
rection, and    ascension — but   not  that   corporally   that 

'See  Tract  XCt 


226  THE  lord's  supper. 

sitteth  in  heaven."  *  Here  Christ  is  described  as  within 
the  believer,  but  not  really  or  corporally.  The  truth  and 
the  benefit  of  his  nativity,  passion,  resurrection,  and 
ascension,  which  could  be  only  within  the  soul,  and  by 
faith,  are  within  the  believer.  This  is  the  spiritual 
presence  of  Christ  in  the  believer's  heart. 

The  same  signification  is  perceived  to  belong  to  the 
term  really  in  the  following  passage:  "  As  for  this  word 
really,  in  such  a  sense  as  you  expound  it  (that  is  to  say, 
not  in  jmantasy  and  imagination,  but  verily  and  truly,) 
so  I  grant  that  Christ  is  really  not  only  in  them  that 
duly  receive  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  but 
also  in  them  that  duly  receive  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism, 
and  in  all  other  true  Christian  people  at  other  times  when 
they  receive  no  Sacrament.^' ^  Christ's  presence  "in 
those  who  duly  receive  Baptism,"  and  "  in  true  Chris- 
tian people  when  they  receive  no  Sacrament,"  is  that 
presence  of  which  St.  Paul  speaks,  when  he  pr^ys  that 
"  Christ  maydwelP^  in  the  hearts  of  the  Ephesians,  "  by 
fuijih.^^  By  really  it  is  plain  Cranmer  does  not  mean 
corporally. 

But  we  will  arrange  our  quotations  from  him  in  such 
order  as  to  show  that  it  is  in  one  of  the  four  senses  above 
specified,  that  this  master-builder  of  the  Communion 
Service  always  speaks  of  the  presence  of  Christ: 

1.  Christ  is  described  as  sacramentally  present  in  the 
following  passages  :  JL^     .. 

"And  as  before  is  at  length  declared,  a  figure  hath 


s  Wadsworth,  Eccl.  Biography,  vol.  i,  p.  218. 
^Cranmer  on  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  (Parker  So- 
ciety Edition,)  p.  140.  »'V'   S> 


THE  lobd's  supper.  227 

the  name  of  a  thing  that  is  signified  thei-eby.  As  a  man's 
image  is  called  a  man,  a  lion's  image  a  lion,  a  bird's 
image  a  bird,  and  an  image  of  a  tree  and  herb  is  called 
a  tree  or  herb  ;  >o  were  we  wont  to  say  '  our  lady  of 
Walsingham,'  'our  lady  of  Ipswich,'  'our  lady  of 
Grace,'  '  our  lady  of  Pity,'  '  St.  P«ter  of  Milan,'  and 
'  St.  James  of  Amias,'  and  such  like  ;  not  meaning  the 
things  themselves,  but  calling  their  images  by  the  name 
of  the  things  by  them  represented."  "  So  doth  John 
Chrysostom  say,  that  we  see  Christ  with  our  eyes  ;  touch 
him  ;  feel  him  ;  grope  him  with  our  hands  ;  fix  our  teeth 
in  his  flesh  ;  taste  it,  break  it,  eat  it,  and  digest  it ;  make 
red  our  tongues  and  dye  them  with  his  blood,  and  swal- 
low it,  and  drink  it." 

"And  in  a  Catechism  by  me  translated  and  set  forth, 
I  used  like  manner  of  speech,  that  with  our  bodily 
mouths  we  receive  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  Which 
my  saying,  divers  ignorant  persons,  not  used  to  read  old 
ancient  authors,  nor  acquainted  with  their  phrase  and 
manner  of  speech,  did  carp  and  reprehend  for  lack  of 
good  understanding  '"" 

This  passage  has  a  threefold  value.  It  proves  how 
readily  Cranmer  spoke  of  the  symbol  as  if  it  were  that 
which  it  signified  ;  it  shows  in  what  manner  he  under- 
stood the  stronfjest  expressions  of  the  fathers  which 
appeared  to  imply  a  bodily  presence  ;  and  it  conclusive- 
ly vindicates  him  from  the  charge  of  having  been  a  Con- 
substantiationist  at  the  time  he  translated  and  published 
the  German  Catechi>nj  of  Justus  Jonas. 


Cranny  oiLibe  Sacraraem,  325,  2?6.       ^ 


228  THE  lord's  supper. 

"  The  bread  and  wine  be  not  Christ's  very  body  and 
blood,  but  they  be  figures  which  by  Christ's  institution 
be  unto  the  godly  receivers  thereof  sacraments,  tokens, 
significations,  and  representations  of  his  very  flesh  and 
blood  ;  instructing  their  faith,  that  as  the  bread  and  wine 
feed  them  corporally  and  continue  this  temporal  life,  so 
the  ver}'^  flesh  and  blood  of  Christ  feedeth  thein  spiritu- 
ally, and  giveth  them  everlasting  life."" 

"  And  although  Christ  in  his  human  nature,  substan- 
tially, really,  corporally,  naturally,  and  sensibly,  be 
present  with  his  Father  in  Heaven,  yet,  sacramentally 
and  spiritually,  he  is  here  present.  For  in  water,  bread, 
and  wine,  he  is  present,  as  in  signs  and  sacraments;  but 
he  is  indeed  spirituaUy  in  those  faithful  Christian  peo- 
ple, who,  according  to  Christ's  ordinance,  be  baptized, 
or  receive  the  Holy  Communion,  or  unfeignedly  believe 
in  hiin."'^  In  this  passage  we  have  the  description 
both  of  the  sacramentarpresence  of  Christ  in  the  water, 
the  bread,  and  wine,  and  his  spiritual,  presence  in  the 
hearts  of  the  believing  recipients  of  either  Sacrament. 
The  idea,  so  often  repeated  by  him,  that  Christ  was 
present  in  the  Holy  "Communion  no  otherwise  than  in 
Baptism,  sufficiently  shows  what  kind  of  presence  he 
allowed. 

2.  Christ's  presence  by  his  grace  and  virtue  is  de- 
scribed in  the  following  passages  : 

"  And  they  be  no  vain  or  bare  tokens,  as  you  would 
persuade,  (for  a  bare  token  is  that  which  betokeneth 

11  Card  well's  two  Liturgies  Compared^  p.  xxix. 
i'  Cranmer  on  the  Sacrament,  p.  47. 


THE  lord's  supper.  229 

only  and  giveth  nothing,  as  a  painted  fire  which  giveth 
neither  light  nor  heat,)  but  in  the  due  administration  of 
the  Sacraments,  God  is  present,  workiii;^  with  his  Word 
and  Sacraments." 

''And  therefore  you  gather  of  my  sayings  unjustly, 
that  Christ  is  indeed  absent;  for  I  say,  (according  to 
God's  Word  and  the  doctrine  of  the  old  writers,)  that 
Christ  is  present  in  his  Sacraments,  as  they  teach  also 
that  he  is  present  in  his  Word,  when  he  worketh  might- 
ily by  the  same  in  the  hearts  of  his  hearers.  By  which 
manner  of  speech  is  not  meant  that  Christ  is  corporally 
present  in  the  voice  or  sound  of  the  preacher,  (which 
soon  perisheth  as  soon  as  the  words  be  spoken,)  but  this 
speech  meaneth  that  he  worketh  with  his  Word,  using 
the  voice  of  the  sj)eaker  as  his  instrument  to  work  by; 
as  he  useth  also  his  Sacraments,  whereby  he  worketh  and 
therefore  is  said  to  be  present  in  them.''''^'  The  presence 
of  Christ  in  the  Word  is  a  presence  of  his  grace  and 
spirit.  Such,  says  Cranmer,  is  his  presehce  in  the  Sa- 
crament. A  multitude  of  passages  conveying  this  sense 
may  be  found  in  the  writings  of  Cranmer,  and  a  still 
greater  number  in  those  of  Ridley.  The  sense  of  the 
above  passage  is  brought  out  very  clearly  in  the  preface 
to  his  book  against  Bishop  Gardiner.  "Moreover,  (says 
he,)  when  I  say  and  repeat  many  times  in  my  book  that 
the  body  of  Christ  is  present  in  them  that  worthily 
receive  the  Sacrament,  lest  any  man  should  mistake  my 
words  and  think  that  I  mean,  that  although  Christ  be  not 
corporally  in  the  outward  visible  signs,  he  is  corporally 

'*  Cranmejr  on  the  Sacraraen:,  p,  U. 


230  THE  lord's  supper. 

in  the  persons  that  duly  receive  them,  this  is  to  adver- 
tise the  reader  that  I  do  no  such  thing.  But  my  mean- 
ing is,  that  the  force^  the  grace,  virtue^  and  benefits  of 
Christ's  body  that  M^as  crucified  for  us,  and  of  his  blood 
that  vpas  shed  for  us,  be  really  and  effectually  with  them 
that  duly  receive  the  Sacrament." 

3.  Every  page  of  the  work  on  the  Sacrament  has 
tes^timonies  in  every  form  to  the  spiritual  presence  of 
Christ  in  the  believer's  heart,  as  that  whereon  by  faith 
he  feeds  and  lives. 

"But  here  you  take  such  large  scope  that  you  flee 
from  the  four  proper  matters  that  be  in  controversy, 
unto  a  new  scope  devised  by  you  that  I  should  absolutely 
deny  the  presence  of  Christ,  and  :  ay  that  the  bread 
doth  only  signify  Christ's  body  absent;  which  thing  I 
never  said  nor  thought.  And  as  Christ  saith  not  so, 
nor  Paul  saith  not  so,  even  so  likewise  I  say  not  so; 
and  ni}^  book  in  divers  places,  saith  clean  contrary,  that 
Christ  is  with  us  spiritually  present,  is  eaten  and 
drunken  of  us,  and  dwelleth  within  us,  although  cor- 
porally he  be  departed  out  of  this  world  and  is  asceiided 
up  to  heaven.""  The  absence  of  Christ's  body  is  here 
denied.  Its  presence  is  affirmed  How  is  it  present? 
not  corporally,  for  so  he  is  in  heaven.  He  is  spiritually 
present  as  opposed  to  corporally.  He  is  present  by 
faith  in  the  believer's  heart.  That  this  is  his  meaning 
is  clear  beyond  all  possibility  of  mistake  from  the  fol- 
lowing passage : 

"And  if  Christ  had  never  ordained  the  Sacrament, 

**  Cranmer  on  the  Sacrament^  p.  12 


THE  lord's  supper.  231 

yet  should  we  have  eaten  his  flesh  and  drunken  his 
blood,  and  have  had  thereby  everlasting  life;  as  all  the 
faithful  did  before  the  Sacrament  was  ordained,  and  do 
daily  when  they  receive  not  the  Sacrament.  And  so  did 
holy  men  that  wandered  in  the  wilderness,  and  in  all 
their  lifetime  very  seldom  received  the  Sacrament;  and 
many  holy  martyrs,  either  exiled  or  kept  in  prison,  did 
daily  eat  of  the  food  of  Christ's  body,  and  drank  daily  the 
blood  that  sprang  out  of  his  side,  or  else  they  could  not 
have  had  everlasting  life,  as  Christ  himself  said  in  the 
Gospel  of  St.  John,  and  yet  they  were  not  suffered  with 
other  Christian  people  to  have  the  use  of  their  Sacra- 
ments."" How  precisely  this  language  corresponds 
with  that  of  the  rubric  in  the  Communion  Office  for  the 
Sick! 

Again:  "The  true  eating  and  drinking  of  the  said 
body  and  blood  of  Christ  is,  with  a  constant  and  lively 
faith^  to  believe  that  Christ  gave  his  body  and  shed  his 
blood  upon  the  cross  for  us,  and  that  he  doth  so  join  and 
incorporate  himself  to  us,  that  he  is  our  head,  and  we 
his  members,  and  flesh  of  his  flesh  and  bone  of  his 
bone,  having  him  dwelling  in  us  and  we  in  him.  jJnd 
herein.:  standeth  the  whole  effect  and  strength  of  this  Sa- 
crament.'^    (p.  43.) 

And  again:  "\ye  say,  as  the  Scripture  tearheth,  that 
Christ  is  corporally  ascended  into  heaven,  and,  never- 
theless, he  is  so  in  them  that  worthily  eat  the  bread  and 
drink  the  wine  given  and  distributed  at  his  Holy  Supper, 
that  he  feedeth  and  nourisheth  them  with  his  flesh  and 
blood."" 

'^  Cranmer  on  the  Sacrament,  p.  25.    See  also,  p.  75. 
'«ld,,p.  54. 


232  THE  lord's  supper. 

And,  finally,  on  this  point.  "And,  therefore,  in  the 
Book  of  Holy  Communion  we  do  not  pray  absolutely 
that  the  bread  and  wine  may  be  made  the  body  and 
blood  of  Christ,  but  that  unto  us  in  that  holy  mystery 
thet/  may  be  so;^'  that  is  to  say,  that  we  may  so  worthily 
receive  the  same  that  we  may  be  partakers  of  Christ's 
body  and  blood,  and  that  therewith  in  spirit  and  in  truth 
we  may  be   spiritually  nourished."      (p.  79.) 

Quotations  to  the  same  purport  might  be  almost  in- 
definitely multiplied;  but  it  is  believed  that  these  are 
superfluously  sufhcient  to  confirm  our  position. 

4.  In  common  with  Jewel,  Cranmer  also  speaks  of 
the  real  presence  of  Christ's  body  to  the  believer,  be- 
cause his  faith  ascends  to  embrace  it  in  heaven. 

"And  so  the  old  doctors  do  call  this  speaking  of 
Christ  typical,  figurative,  anagogical,  allegorical;  which 
they  do  iuterpiet  after  this  sort,  that  although  the  sub- 
stance of  bread  and  wine  do  remain  and  be  received  of 
the  faithful,  yet  notwithstanding  Christ  changed  the  ap- 
pellation thereof,  and  called  the  bread  by  the  name  of 
his  flesh,  and  the  wine  by  the  name  of  hi>  blood,  non 
rei  veritate  sed  significanie  mysterio;  that  is,  'not  that  it 
is  so  in  very  deed,  but  signified  in  a  mystery;'  so  that 
we  should  consider  not  what  they  be  in  their  own 
nature,  but  what  they  impart  to  ua.  and  signify;  and 
should  understand  the  Sacrament  not  carnally  but  spirit- 
ually; and  should  attend  not  to  the  visible  nature  of  the 
Sacraments,  neither  have  respect  only  to  the  outward 

"  Reference  is  here  m8i(}p  to  the  ComKi  union  Service  of  the  fifSt 
book  of  Edward. 


THE  lord's  supper.  233 

bread  and  cup,  thinking  to  see  there  with  our  eyes  no 
other  things  but  only  bread  and  wine;  but  that  lifting 
up  our  minds  we  should  look  up  to  the  blood  of  Christ 
with  our  faith,  should  touch  him  with  our  mind,  and  re- 
•ceive  him  with  our  inward  man;  and  that,  being  like 
eagles  in  this  life,  we  should  fly  up  into  h<nven  in  our 
hearts,  where  that  Lamb  is  resident  at  the  right  hand  of 
the  Father,  ■which  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  world; 
by  whose  stripes  we  are  made  whole;  by  whose  passion 
we  are  filled  at  his  table;  and  whose  blood  we  receiving 
out  of  his  holy  side,  do  live  forever;  being  made  the 
guests  of  Christ,  having  him  dwell  in  us  through  the 
grace  of  his  true  nature,  and  through  the  virtue  and 
efficacy  of  his  whole  passion;  being  no  less  certified 
and  assured  that  wo  are  fed  spiritually  unto  eternal  life 
by  Christ's  flesh  crucified,  and  by  his  blood  shed,  the 
true  food  of  our  minds,  than  that  our  bodies  be  fed  with 
meat  and  drink  in  this  life.'"" 

These  four  methods  of  stating  and  explaining  the 
doctrine  of  the  real  presence^  in  each  of  w'hich  he  care- 
fully disclaims  a  bodily  presence  in  the  elements,  or  at 
the  Sacrament,  or  in  the  receiver,  and  reiteratedly  insists 
on  the  sacramental  presence,  or  the  spiritual  presence 
of  Christ  in  the  heart,  and  by  grace,  and  to  faith,  con- 
tain the  entire  doctrine  of  Cranmer  on  the  subject. 
His  views  upon  the  Eucharist,  as  a  sacrifice  propitia- 
tory for  sin,  are  no  less  explicit. 

"The  memorial  of  the  true  sacrifice  upon  the  cross, 
as  St.  Augustine  saith,  is  called  by  the  name  of  a  sacri- 

*  Cranmer's  Works.    Disputation  at  Oxford,  vol.  i,  p.  393. 


234  THE  lord's  supper. 

fice,  as  a  thing  that  signifieth  another  thing  is  called  by 
the  name  of  the  thing  which  it  signifieth,  although,  in 
very  deed  it  be  not  the  same."'^ 

"  I  speak  plainly,  according  to  St.  Paul  and  St.  John, 
that  only  Christ  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins  by  his 
death.  You  speak  according  to  the  Papists,  that  the 
Priests  in  their  masses  make  a  sacrifice  propitiatory.  I 
call  a  sacrifice  propitiatory,  according  to  the  Scripture, 
such  a  sacrifice  as  pacifieth  God's  indignation  against  us, 
obtaineth  mercy  and  forgiveness  of  all  our  sins,  and  is 
our  ransom  and  redemption  from  everlasting  damnation. 
And,  on  the  other  hand,  I  call  a  sacrifice  gratificatory, 
or  the  sacrifice  of  the  Church,  such  a  sacrifice  as  does 
not  reconcile  us  to  God,  but  ivS  made  of  them  that  be 
reconciled,  to  testify  their  duties,  and  to  show  them- 
selves thankful  unto  him.  And  these  sacrifices,  in 
Scripture,  be  not  called  propitiatory,  but  sacrifices  of 
justice,  of  laud,  praise,  and  thanksgiving.* 

"  Therefore,  when  the  old  fatliers  called  the  Mass  or 
Supper  of  the  Lord  a  sacrifice,  they  meant  it  was  a 
sacrifice  of  lauds  and  thanksgiving,  (and  so  as  well  the 
people  as  the  Priest  do  sacrifice,)  or  else  that  it  was  a 
remembrancer  of  the  true  propitiatory  sacrifice  of  Christ; 
but  they  meant,  in  'to  wise,  that  it  is  a  very  true  sacrifice 
for  sin,  and  applicable  by  the  Priest  to  the  quick  and 
dead."     (p.  352.) 

These  testimonies  (and  the  whole  of  the  fifth  book  on 
the  Sacrament  is  full  of  them)  exclude  every  sense  of  a 
sacrifice  in  the  Eucharist,  other  than  that  of  praise  and 

"*  Cranmer  on  the  Sacrament,  p.  87.  *"  Id.,  p.  361.     - 


THE  lord's  supper.  235 

thanksgiving.  He  calls  the  Lord's  Supper  a  sacrifice, 
either  because  it  commemorates  that  of  Christ,  or  be- 
cause it  is  a  sacrifice  of  thanks  and  praise.  It  is  ottered 
up  by  the  people  as  well  as  the  Priest,  he  speaking  in 
their  name.  In  no  wise — in  no  sense  and  to  no  degree 
— is  it  a  sacrifice  or  propitiation  for  sin.  Any  length- 
ened comments  on  these  clear  testimonies  is  unneces- 
sary. 

We  now  turn  to  the  testimony  of  Bishop  Ridley.  It 
has  been  very  confidently  stated  to  differ  from  that  of 
Archbishop  Cranmer.  The  latter  has  been  confessed  to 
testify  against  the  views  which  we  have  censured, 
while  the  former  has  been  claimed  as  their  advocate. 
Says  Mr.  Palmer,  (on  the  Church,  vol.  i,  p.  471,)  ^'  I 
shall  not  attempt  to  defend  all  the  docrines  of  Cranmer 
in  his  Treatise  on  the  Sacrament,  A.  D.  1550,  and  his 
answer  to  Gardiner  the  next  year,  which  in  fact  (though 
he  seems  not  to  have  been  aware  of  it)  amounted  to  a 
denial  of  the  real  presence,  and  is  very  different  from 
that  of  Ridley  and  Poynet,  from  the  Necessary  Doctrine, 
the  Homilies,  and  the  Prayer-Book,  composed  in  1548." 

Thf'  importance  of  Ridley's  testimony. on  this  subject 
can  hardly  be  over-estimated.  On  this  point,  Cranmer 
was  his  pupil.  His  enemies  testify  to  his  predominat- 
ing influence  in  fixing  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist. 
Said  the  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  on  Ridley's  last  exami- 
nation before  the  commissioners  at  Oxford,  "  Latimer 
leaneth  to  Cranmer,  Cranmer  to  Ridley,  and  Ridley  to 
the  singularity  of  his  own  wit;  so  that  if  you  overthrew 


236  THE  lord's  supper. 

the  singularity  of  Ridley's  wit,  then  must  needs  the  re- 
ligion of  Cranmer  and  Latimer  fall  also."^' 

Now  we  venture  to  say  that  the  testimony  of  Ridley 
will  be  found  to  be  no  stronger  and  none  other  than  that 
of  Cranmer.  Like  him,  he  avows  the  real  presence  in 
clear  terms;  like  him,  he  explains  it  to  be  a  figurative 
or  sacramental  presence;  or  a  presence  by  grace;  or  a 
spiritual  presence  of  Christ  in  the  heart;  or  a  presence 
to  faith  of  Christ's  body  which  is  in  heaven.  Like  him, 
he  repudiates  the  doctrine  of  a  sacrifice  in  the  Eucharir-t, 
other  than  that  of  praise  and  thanksgiving. 

First  we  find  him  admitting  Christ's  real  presence  at 
the  Eucharist.  The  passage,  however,  which  contains 
this  statement  in  its  strongest  form,  contains  also  as 
strong  a  testimony  against  a  carnal  or  corporal  presence. 
I  know  no  passage  in  Ridley's  works  in  which  his  lan- 
guage is  stronger  than  in  the  following.  Yet  it  is  plain 
from  it  alone,  by  the  expressions  that  he  ''is  present  by 
spirit  and  grace,"  and  by  the  explanation  of  eating  and 
drinking  Christ's  body  and  blood  that  "  he  is  made 
effectually  partaker  of  his  passion,"  that  he  meant  no 
gross  presence  of  a  real  body. 

"  For  both  you  and  I  agree  herein,  that  in  the  Sacra- 
ment is  the  very  true  and  natural  body  and  blood  of 
Christ,  ^even  that  which  was  born  of  the  Virgin  Mary, 
which  ascended  into  heaven,  which  sitteth  on  the  right 
hand  of  God  the  Father,  which  shall  come  from  thence 
to  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead;  only  we  differ  in  mode, 
in  the  way  and  manner  of  being;  we  confess  all  one 
thing  to  be  in  the  Sacrament,  and  dissent  in  the  man- 

2'  Ridley's  Works,  Parker  edition,  p.  883. 


TiTB  lord's  supper.  237 

ner  of  being  there.  I,  boing  fully  by  God's  word  there- 
unto persuaded,  confess  Christ's  natural  body  to  be  in 
the  Sacrament,  indeed,  by  spirit  and  grace,  because 
that  whosoever  receiveth  worthily  that  bread  and  wine, 
receiveth  effectuously  Christ's  body,  and  drinketh  his 
blood,  (Jhni  is,  he  is  made  effeciuaUy  partaker  of  his 
passion:)  and  you  make  a  grosser  kind  of  being,  en- 
closing a  natural,  a  lively,  and  a  moving  body,  under 
the  shape  or  form  of  bread  and  wine."-- 

We  shall  now  verify  our  statement  of  the  sense  in 
which  he  held  a  bodily  presence  by  other  extracts  from 
his  writings.  A  passage  brought  for  one  point  of 
proof  will  often  be  found  equally  available  for  another. 

1.  And,  first,  we  show  that  Ridley  sometimes  spoke  of 
the  body  as  present  by  figure  or  Sacrament. 

"  Now,  on  the  other  side,  if,  after  the  truth  shall  be 
truly  tried  out,  it  shall  be  found  that  the  substance  of 
bread  is  the  material  substance  of  the  Sacrament ; 
although  for  the  change  of  the  use,  office  and  dignity  of 
the  bread,  the  bread,  indeed,  sacramentally  is  changed 
into  the  body  of  Christ,  as  the  water  in  Baptism  is 
sacramentally  changed  into  the  fountain  of  regenera- 
tion, and  yet  the  material  substance  thereof  remaineth 
all  one  as  was  before,"  &c.^'' 

Unless  the  substance  of  water  be  changed  in  Baptism, 
then  the  substance  of  the  bread  remains  unchanged  in 
the  Eucharist.  That  by  the  expression  "  sacramentally 
changed  into  the  body  of  Christ,"  was  not  meant  that 


««Ridley'sWorks,  p.  274. 

"  Wadsworth,  Eccl.  Biography,  vol.  iii,  p.  la. 


238  THE   lord's    SUPPERo 

Christ's  body  was  in,  or  under,  or  with  the  bread,  is 
evident  from  the  first  of  the  following  extracts,  and  that 
it  was  meant  that  he  was  there  only  by  figure^  is  proved 
by  the  second. 

"As  for  Melancthon,  quoth  I,  whom  Mr.  Feckham 
spoke  of,  I  marvell  that  he  will  alledge  him,  for  we  are 
more  nigh  an  argument  here  in  England  than  the  opin- 
ion of  Melancthon  to  you.  For  on  this  point  we  all 
agree  here,  that  there  is  in  the  Sacrament  but  one  material 
substance,  and  Melancthon,  as  I  ween,  saith  there  are 
two." 

"What  author  have  ye,"  quoth  Mr.  Secretary,  "to 
make  of  the  Sacrament  a  figure  ?" 

"Sir,"  quoth  I,  "ye  know  I  think  that  TertuUian  in 
plain  words  speaketh  thus:  'Hoc  est  corpus  meum.  Id 
est,  figura  corporis  mei.'  This  is  my  body;  that  is  to 
say,  afigtire  of  my  body-''''"'' 

Ridley  was  accused,  in  Queen  Mary's  reign,  of  hav- 
ing, in  1550,  set  forth  the  corporal  presence  of  Christ. 
The  accusation  was  made  by  Feckham,  in  a  sermon  at 
St.  Paul's  Cross.  Here,  in  his  denial  of  the  charge,  he 
declared  that  he  called  the  bread  the  body  of  Christ, 
"because  unto  this  material  tubstance  is  given  (that  is, 
attributed)  the  property  of  the  thing  whereof  it  beareth 
the  name."-'  And  again,  in  the  Disputation  at  Oxford, 
he  uses  this  language:  "The  Sacrament  of  the  blood  is 
the  blood  ;  and  that  is  attributed  to  the  Sacrament  which 
is  spoken  of  the  thing  of  the  Sacrament.''''  '^'^ 

^■•Ridley  at  the  Tower.     Ecclesiastical  Biography,  vol.  iii,  p.  18. 
^^  Strype's  Ecclesiastical  iVIemorials,  vol.  i,  p.  70. 
''^ Ridley's  Works,  p.  238. 


THE  lord's  supper.  239 

2.  But  a.  very  frequent  and  favorite  method  with 
Ridley  of  explaining  Christ's  true  presence  at  the 
Eucharist,  was  to  show  that  he  was  present  by  the 
grace  and  efficacy  of  his  crucified  body.  As  Cranmer 
more  frequently  explained  it  by  a  spiritual  presence  of 
Christ  in  the  hearts  of  the  faithful — though,  as  we  have 
seen,  he  sometimes  spoke  of  his  presence  by  grace — so 
Ridley  more  frequently  used  this  mode  of  explication. 

"Now,  then,  you  will  say,  what  kind  of  presence  do 
they  grant,  and  what  do  they  deny?  Briefly,  they  deny 
the  presence  of  Christ's  body  in  the  natural  substance 
ot  his  human  and  assumed  nature,  and  grant  the  pres- 
ence of  the  same  by  grace ;  that  is,  they  atfirm  and  say 
that  the  substance  of  the  natural  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  is  only  remaining  in  heaven,  and  so  shall  be  unto 
the  latter  day,  when  he  shall  come  again  in  glory  accom- 
panied with  the  angels  of  heaven,  to  judge  both  the 
quick  and  the  dead.  And  the  same  natural  substance 
of  the  very  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  because  it  is  united 
in  the  divine  nature  of  Christ,  the  second  person  of  the 
Trinity,  therefore  it  hath  not  only  life  in  itself,  but  is 
also  able  to  give  life  unto  so  many  as  be  or  shall  be 
partakers  thereof;  that  is,  that  to  all  who  believe  on  his 
name  which  are  born  not  of  blood,  as  St.  John  saith,  or 
of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  or  of  the  will  of  man,  but  are 
born  of  God,  though  the  self  same  substance  abide  still 
in  heaven,  and  they  for  the  time  of  their  pilgrimage 
abide  here  on  earth  ;  by  grace  (I  say)  thai  is,  by  the  gift 
of  this  life,  (mentioned  in  John,)  and  the  proportion  of 
the  same,  meet  for  our  pilgrimage  here  upon  earth,  the 
same  body  of  Christ  is  here  present  with  us.    Even,  for 


240  THE  lord's  supper. 

example,  we  say  the  same  sun,  which  in  substance 
never  removeth  his  place  out  of  heaven,  is  yet  present 
here  by  his  beams,  light  and  natural  influence,  when  it 
shineth  upon  earth.  For  God's  Word  and  his  Sacra- 
ments be,  as  it  were,  the  beams  of  Christ,  which  is  Sol 
justitice,  the  Sun  of  Righteousness."'^' 

According  to  this  passage  the  body  of  Christ  is  in 
heaven,  and  is  present  by  grace.  Lest  even  this  expres- 
sion should  be  misunderstood,  it  is  explained  to  be  "the 
gift  of  life."  Unless  we  are  prepared  to  contend  that 
the  light  of  the  sun  on  earth  is  the  sun  which  is  in 
heaven,  we  cannot  attribute  to  Ridley  the  doctrine  of 
the  corporal  presence. 

The  following  passage  is  very  valuable,  as  showing 
in  what  sense  Ridley  understood  the  fathers  on  this 
subject.  The  expressions  towards  the  close  of  the  quo- 
tation, show  that  when  the  strongest  terms  which  lan- 
guage affords,  which  convey  the  meaning  that  Christ — 
whole  Christ — is  present  in  the  Sacrament,  are  used, 
all  that  is  meant  by  them  is,  that  there  is  "the  spirit  of 
Christ ;  that  is,  the  power  of  the  Word  of  God.'''' 

"I  say  and  believe,  that  there  is  not  only  a  significa- 
tion of  Christ's  body  set  forth  by  the  Sacrament,  but 
also  that  therewith  is  given  to  the  godly  and  faiihful  the 
grace  of  Christ's  body,  that  is,  the  food  of  life  and  im- 
mortality. And  this  I  hold  with  Cyprian.  I  say,  also, 
with  St.  Augustine,  that  we  eat  life,  and  we  drink  life  ; 
with  Emissene,  that  we  feel  the  Lord  to  be  present  in 
grace  ;  with  Athanasius,  that  we  receive  celestial  food, 

"Ridley's  Works,  p.  12. 


THE  lord's  supper.  241 

which  Cometh  from  above  ;  the  property  of  natural  com- 
munion, with  Hilary;  the  nature  of  flesh,  and  benedic- 
tion which  giveth  Hfe,  in  bread  and  wine,  with  Cyril ; 
and  with  the  same  Cyril,  the  virtue  of  the  very  flesh  of 
Christ,  life  and  grace  of  his  body,  the  property  of  the 
onlv  begotten,  that  is  to  say,  life  ;  as  he  himself  in  plain 
words  expoundeth  it. 

"I  confess,  also,  with  Basil,  that  we  receive  the  mys- 
tical advent  and  coming  of  Christ,  grace,  and  the  virtue 
of  his  very  nature  ;  the  Sacrament  of  his  very  flesh, 
with  Ambrose  ;  the  body  by  grace,  with  Epiphanius ; 
spiritual  flesh,  but  not  that  which  was  crucified,  with 
Jerome ;  grace  flowing  tnto  a  sacrifice,  and  the  grace  of 
the  Spirit,  with  Chrysostom  ;  grace  and  invisible  verity, 
grace  and  society  of  the  members  of  Christ's  body,  w^ith 
Augustine.  Finally,  with  Bertram  (who  was  the  last 
of  all  these,)  I  confess  that  Christ's  body  is  in  the  Sac- 
rament in  this  respect,  namely,  as  he  writeth,  because 
there  is  in  it  the  spirit  of  Christ,  that  is,  the  power  of 
the  Word  of  God,  which  not  only  feedeth  the  soul,  but 
also  cleanseth  it.  Out  of  these  I  suppose  it  may  clearly 
appear  unto  all  men,  how  far  we  are  from  that  opinion, 
whereof  some  go  about  falsely  to  slander  us  to  the  world, 
saying,  we  teach  that  the  goldly  and  faithful  should 
receive  nothing  else  at  the  Lord's  Table,  but  a  figure  of 
the  body  of  Christ."-" 

In  what  sense  Ridley  regarded  the  spirit  of  Christ  in 
the  Sacrament,  the  following  passage  explains: 

"This  Sacrament  hath  the  promise  of  grace  to  those 

-^Ridley's  Works,  pp.  201,  202. 
11 


242  THE  lord's  supper. 

who  receive  it  worthily,  because  grace  is  given  by  it  as 
by  an  instrument ;  not  that  Christ  hath  transfused  grace 
into  the  bread  and  wine.'' '^'^ 

Again:  "He  took  his  flesh  with  him  after  the  true 
and  corporal  substance  of  his  body  and  flesh  ;  again,  he 
left  the  same  in  mystery  to  the  faithful  in  his  Supper, 
to  be  received  after  a  spiritual  communication  and  grace. 
Neither  is  the  same  in  the  Supper  only,  but  also  at  other 
times,  by  hearing  the  Gospel  and  by  faith. 

3.  The  presence  of  Christ,  by  his  spirit,  in  the  heart 
of  the  believer,  upon  which  Cranmer  so  much  dwells, 
is  implied  in  the  declarations  which  so  frequently  occur 
in  the  writings  of  Ridley,  that  "the  true  and  corporal 
substance  of  his  flesh"  is  not  received  in  the  Supper 
only,  "but  also  at  other  times,  by  hearing  the  Gospel 
and  by  faith."'" 

4.  In  like  manner  Ridley  does  not,  like  Cranmer  and 
Jewel,  dwell  upon  and  repeat  the  idea  of  Christ's  pres- 
ence in  heaven  to  the  faith  that  ascends  and  embraces 
him.  Yet  he  again  and  again  contends  that  Christ's 
body  is  in  heaven  and  nowhere  else,  and  that  it  i.-  pre- 
sent only  to  faith,  beholding  it  as  the  only  source  of 
grace  and  life. 

His  views  upon  the  Eucharist,  as  -a  sacriticr,  arc 
summarily  expressed  in  the  following  passage  : 

"  1  know  that  all  these  places  of  the  Scripture  are 
avoided  by  two  manner  of  subtle  shifts;  the  one  is,  bv 
the  distinction  of  the  bloody  and  unbloody  sacrifice,  as 
though  our  unbloody  sacrjflce  of  the  Church  were  any 

29  Ridley's  Works,  p.  241.  ^"/rf.,  p.  222. 


THE  lord's  supper.  243 

other  than  the  sacrifice  of  praise  and  thanksgiving,  than 
a  commemoration,  a  showing  forth,  and  a  sacramental 
representation  of  that  one  only  bloody  sacrifice,  otfered 
up  once  for  all."  " 

The  quotations  which  follow  from  Bishop  Jewel,  will 
1)0  found  to  coincide  with  those  of  Ridley  and  Cranmer. 
To  the  authority  of  this  eminent  Reformer's  writings, 
we  give  the  following  additional  testimony  of  Archbishop 
Williams: 

"-Three  great  princes  successively,  (namely.  Queen 
Elizabeth,  King  James  1,  and  King  Charles  I,)  the  one 
after  the  other,  and  four  Archbishops  of  very  eminent 
parts,  (Parker,  Grindal,  VVhitgift,  and  Bancroft,)  have 
been  so  satisfied  of  the  truth  and  learning  of  this  book, 
that  they  have  imposed  it  to  be  chained  up  and  read  in 
;dl  j^arish  cliurclies  throughout  England  and  Wales. "^- 

Tlie  Sacraments  he  calls,  after  the  manner  of  the 
(Catholic  fathers,  '^  Jigures;  sig7is,  marks,  badges,  prints, 
cupies,  forms,  seals,  signets,  ^'miHtudes,  patterns:,  repie- 
seiitalions,  remembrances,  and  memories.  And  we  make 
no  doubt,"  he  adds,  "together  with  the  same  doctors, 
to  say  that  these  be  certain  visible  words,  seals  of 
rigliUousness,  and  tokens  of  grace. ^^  ■^^' 

'i'lie.  formal  definition  which  he  gives  of  the  Eucharist 
is  as  follows: 

"  We  say,  that  Evc/iaristia,  that  is  to  say,  the  Supper 
of  the  Lord,  is  a  Sacrament — that  is,  an  evident  repre- 

""  Ridley's  Works,  p.  II. 

^''  Ai-chbisliop  Williain.s'  Holy  Talile,  Name  and  Thing. 

''•'Apology,  pp.  49,  50. 


244  THE  lord's  supper. 

sentation — of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  wherein  is 
set,  as  it  were,  before  our  eyes,  the  death  of  Christ,  and 
his  resurrection,  and  whatsoever  he  did  whilst  he  was 
iti  his  mortal  body;  to  the  end  we  may  give  him  thanks 
tor  his  death,  and  for  our  deliverance;  and  that,  by  the 
often  receiving  of  this  Sacrament,  we  may  daily  renew 
the  remembrance  thereof,  to  the  intent  we,  being  fed 
with  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  may  be  brought  into 
the  hope  of  the  resurrection,  and  of  everlasting  life, 
and  may  most  assuredly  beUeve,  that  as  our  bodie*?  be 
fed  with  bread  and  wine,  so  our  souls  be  fed  with  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ."  '^ 

In  accordance  with  these  views,  he  declares  that 
Christ's  body  is  present  by  mystery  or  symbol,*'  that  the 
elements  are  not  changed,^"  that  Christ's  body  is  in 
heaven,"  and  that  it  is  by  faith  that  we  are  to  reach  up 
our  hands  to  heaven,  and  lay  hold  upon  him  sitting 
there.''"* 

When  he  speaks  of  the  Eucharist  as  more  than  a  bare 
sign,  he  does  not  mean  that  it  in  any  sense  contains  the 
leal  body  of  Christ,  but  that  it  is  a  token  or  seal  of  real 
blessings.     The  following  passage,  from  his  defence  of 


•'■•Tliese  two  kinds  of  eating  must  evermore  necessarily  be  joined 
together.  And  wiiosoeVer  cometli  to  tiie  holy  Table,  and  ad- 
vanccth  not  his  mind  unto  lieaven,  there  to  feed  upon  Christ's  body 
at  the  right  hand  of  God,  heknowcth  not  the  meaning  of  tliese  mys- 
teries, but  is  void  of  nnderstfinding,  as  the  horse  or  mule,  and  re- 
ceiveth  only  the  bare  Sacraments  to  liis  condemnation." — De- 
PKVCE,  p.  223. 

''Apology,  p.  5.5.  *'  Apology,  p.  56.   '  "  Id.,  p.  .W. 

'"Id.,  p.  GO. 


THE  lord's  supper.  245 

♦  lie  Apology,   contains  a  view  ol"  the  suhject  wlucli   i.-s 
often  repeated  in  his  writings: 

"  Neither  hereof  do  we  make  a  bare  or  naked  token, 
as  Mr.  Harding  iinagineth,  but  we  say,  as  St.  Paul  saith, 
it  is  a  perfect  seal  and  a  suflicient  warrant  of  God's 
piomises,  whereby  God  bindeth  himself  unto  us,  and 
we  likewise  stand  bounden  unto  God,  so  as  God  is  our 
God  and  we  are  his  people.  This  I  reckon  no  bare  or 
naked  token.  And  touching  this  word  signum,  (sign,) 
what  it  meaneth,  St.  Augustine  showeth  in  this  sort:  'A 
sign  is  a  thing,  which,  besides  the  form  or  sight  that  it 
otiereth  to  our  senses,  causes  of  itself  some  other  thing 
to  come  to  our  knowledge.'  "  ** 

He  allows  no  other  presence  of  Christ's  body  in  the 
Eucharist  than  there  is  in  the  written  Word.  The  rea- 
der will  notice  the  strength  and  distinctness  of  his  as- 
sertions on  this  point: 

"  If  any  man  thinks  it  strange  that  the  Sacrament  is 
called  the  body  and  llesh  of  Christ,  being  not  so  indeed, 
let  him  understand  that  the  written  Word  of  God  is  also 
called  Christ's  body  and  Christ's  flesh,  even  the  same 
that  was  born  of  the  virgin,  and  that  the  Father  raised 
again  to  life,  although  indeed  it  be  not  so.  So  saith  St. 
Hierom."^'^' 

Jewel  repeatedly  explains  the  real  presence  to  be 
that  of  Christ  in  heaven,  to  the  faith  which  lifts  itself 
up  to  him  and  embraces  him. 

''We  are  taught,  according  to  the' doctrine  of  the 
old  fathers,  to  lift  up  our  heai'ts  to  heaven,  and  there  to 

^»  Jewel's  Defence,  p.  380  ;  edition  of  1565.        ^  Id.,  p.  383. 


246  THE  lord's  supper. 

Teed  on  the  Lainb  of  God.  St.  Chrysof^tom  saith, 
'  Whosoever  will  reach  to  that  body  must  mount  on 
high.'  Augustine  likewise  saith,  <  How  shall  I  lay  hold 
of  him,  being  absent?  How  shall  I  mount  up  to  heaven 
and  hold  him  sitting  there?  Send  up  thy  faith  and  thou 
hast  taken  him.'  Thus  spiritually,  and  with  the  mouth 
of  our  faith,  we  eat  the  body  of  Christ  and  drink  his 
blood,  even  as  verily  as  his  body  was  verily  broken  and 
his  blood  verily  shed  upon  the  cross.  "^' 

He  also  utterly  rejects  any  other  sacrifice  in  the 
Eucharist  than  that  of  praise  ar.d  thanksgiving,  and  thus 
accounts  for  the  use  of  a  phraseology  which  has  intro- 
duced grievous  error  into  the  Church: 

"Howbeitjthe  old  learned  fathers,  as  they  ottentimes 
delighted  themselves  with  these  words,  Subbatltij  Par- 
asceue,  Pascha,  Pentncoste,  and  such  other  like  terms  of 
the  old  law;  even  so  likewise  they  delighted  themselves 
often  with  these  words,  Sacerdos,  Mtare,  Sna-ificum — 
the  Sacrificer,  the  Altar,  the  Sacrifice — notwithstanding 
the  use  thereof  were  then  clearly  expired;  only  for  tiiat 
the  ears  of  the  people,  as  well  of  the  Jew^s  as  of  the 
Gentiles,  had  been  long  acquainted  with  the  same." 
(p.  555.) 

We  have  been  able  only  to  reap  the  outer  edges  of  a 
vast  field  of  testimony  which  lies  outspread  and  invit- 
ingly before  us.  Whoever  will  enter  into  it,  will  be 
able  to  come  out  with  sheaves  fully  ripe  and  heavy  with 
the  golden  grains  of  truth. '" 

""  Jewel's  Defence,  p.  319. 

^- An  account  of  Hooker's  views  on  the  subject  will  be  found  in 
Appendix,  No.  I. 


THE  lord's  suppfr.  '247 

IV.  We  have  no  space  to  devote  to  the  testimony  of 
the  American  Church  against  the  views  which  we  have 
designated  as  erroneous.  It  has  been  seen,  incidentally, 
that  the  adoption  of  the  oblation  ajjd  invocation  which 
was  in  the  first  book  of  Edward,  and  excluded  from  the 
second,  give  no  countenance  to  the  Tractarian  doctrine 
of  a  sacrifice,  expiatory  or  impretatory,  available  to  atone 
for  sin.  The  changes  made  in  the  service  rescue  it 
from  any  such  interpretation.  The  testimony  of  Bishop 
White  on  the  subject,  also  shows  the  views  with  which 
it  was  introduced  into  our  Church.*'' 

We  now  bring  to  a  close  this  protracted  and  yet  most 
imperfect  examination  of  the  views  of  our  Church  on  the 
Lord's  Supper.  If  we  respect  the  opinions  of  those  who 
framed  our  service,  if  we  feel  the  obligation  of  adhering 
to  our  own  standards,  we  can  no  more  admit  that  view 
of  the  Eucharist  which,  to  use  the  language  of  Coleridge, 
"  condeiuies  it  into  an  idol,"  than  we  can  that  which 
"  evaporates  it  into  a  metaphor."  As  a  blessed  memo- 
rial of  the  death  which  is  our  ransom  and  our  life  ;  as  a 
token  of  love,  a  seal  of  forgiveness,,  and  a  means  of 
grace,  it  is  too  full  of  real  blessings  to  need  that  we 
should  attach  to  it  any  which  are  fictitious.  May  we 
have  grace  to  receive  it  with  reverent  and  adoring  grati- 
tude, to  our  souls'  health  and  strength  I 

■•' See  Appendix,  No.  II. 


XL 


Infant  ISaptlsni. 


In  entering  upon  the  consideration  of  the  Baptismal 
Service  of  the  Church,  I  desire  to  repeat  that  the  primary 
object  of  these  pages  is  not  to  show  the  correspondence 
of  the  statements  and  doctrines  and  rites  of  the  Prayer- 
Book  "with  the  teachings  of  the  Bible.  Their  chief  object 
is  to  furnish  information  u])un  the  history  and  origin  of 
various  portions  of  our  Liturgy,  and  to  deduce  from  them 
the  doctrine  ol"  our  present  formulary  of  taith  and  wor- 
ship, "  The  Book  of  Common  Prayer  according  to  the 
use  of  the  Prostestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United 
States."  By  tracing  the  origin  and  marking  the  changes, 
by  addition  or  omission,  of  some  portions  of  this  formu- 
lary, we  have  been  able  to  reach  sure  conclusions  as  to 
what  its  teachings  are.  But  in  entering  upon  the  much 
controverted  subject  now  before  us,  while  we  have  no 
misgivings  as  to  the  propriety  of  the  method  we  are  to 
pursue,  we  feel  the  ditHculty  of  applying  it  successfuU}' 
to  a  service,  which,  if  obscure,  has  been  made  doubly 
so  through  excess  of  explanation. 

Adopting   the    method    hitherto   pursued,    we   shall 


INFANT    BAPTISM. 


249 


sketch  the  history  and  origin  oi'  the  service  for  the  pub- 
lic Baptism  oi  infants  ;  and,  as  our  limits  will  allow, 
dwell  upon  its  prominent  points  of  doctrine. 

History.     The  rubrics  introductory  to  the  service 
are  substantially  the  same  as  they  were  at  the  first.     In 
the  first  Lituroy  of  Edward,  it  is  stated  that  the  Sacra- 
ment   of  Baptism   -was   commonly   ministered   only  on 
Whitsunday   and    Easter.     This  statement  was  subse- 
.|ucntly  omitted.     Sundays  and  holy  days  are  recom- 
mended as  the  most  suitable  for  the  performance  of  the 
rite,  that  the  congregation  may  testify  that  they  receive 
the  newly  baptized  into  the  number  of  Christ's  Church, 
and  that  they  may  be  put  in  remembrance  of  their  own 
baptismal  vows.     The  recommendation  is  retained;  but 
the  excellent  reason  on  which  it  is  grounded,  is  omitted. 
The  present  English  Prayer-Book  contains  a  rubric,  in 
addition  to  the  above,  which  directs  that  for  every  male 
child  there  shall  be  two  godfathers  and  one  godmother, 
and  for  every  female  child  two  godmothers  and  one  god- 
father.'    Our  Church    directs  that  the   same    number 
shall  be  present  when  they  can  be  had,  and  allows  the 
parents  to  stand  as  sponsors  ;  an  arrangement  forbidden 
in  the  English   Church  by  the  twenty-ninth  canon  of 
the  first  year  of  James  I. 

In  the  prayer  which  follows  the  address,  there  are 

'  There  is  a  curious  injunction  in  the  "  advertisements  for  the  or- 
der of  the  due  administration  of  the  Holy  Sacraments,"  &c.,  in  the 
yeir  1564  to  the  effect  that  "  no  child  sliall  be  admitted  to  answer  as 
.odfalherargodmoHm;  except  the  child  hath  received  tlie  Communion.^^ 
^  Liturgical  TractK 

11* 


250  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

expressions  in  the  first  Liturgy  of  Edward,  which  in- 
volve important  points  of  doctrine,  and  which  were 
omitted  in  the  subsequent  revision.  There  is  a  svipplica- 
tion  that  "by  this  wholesome  laver  of  regeneration, 
whatsoever  sin  is  in  thefn  may '  be  washed  clean  away. ' ' 
This  expression,  which  appears  to  involve  the  Romish 
doctrine,  that  by  Baptism  all  sin,  original  and  actual, 
is  not  only  fully  forgiven,  but  completely  destroyed,  is 
omitted.  Another  expression,  that  the  children  to  be 
baptized,  may  be  received  into  the  ark  of  Christ's 
Church,  and  so  saved  from  perishing  —  an  expression 
which  countenances  the  other  Romish  idea,  that  Bap 
tism  is  absolutely  essential  to, salvation — is  also  omitted. 
After  the  first  prayer  in  the  first  Liturgy,  the  rubric 
directs  the  Priest  to  ask  the  name  of  the  child,  and  then 
to  sign  the  cross  upon  its  forehead  and  breast,  saying 
nearly  the  same  form  of  words  which  are  used  when 
the  child  is  baptized.  This  rubric  and  these  words  were 
omitted  upon  the  next  revision  of  the  service.  After 
the  second  prayer,  there  was  in  Edward's  first  Liturgy 
a  form  of  exorcism,  to  expel  the  evil  spirit  from  the 
ciiildren.  As  such  a  form  was  not  unusual  in  the  pri- 
mitive Church,  it  may  at  least  gratify  curiosity  to  insert 
it,  "I  command  thee,  unclean  spirit,  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  and  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that 
thou  come  out  and  depart  from  these  infants,  whom  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  hath  vouchsafed  to  call  to  his  holy 
Baptism,  to  be  made  members  of  his  body  and  of  his 
holy  congregation.  Therefore,  thou  cursed  spirit,  re- 
member thy  sentence,  remember  thy  judgment,  remem- 
ber the  day  to  be  at  hand,  wherein  thou  shalt   burn  in 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  251 

fire  everlasttng,  prepared  lor  tliee  and  thy  angels,  and 
presume  not  hereafter  to  exercise  any  tyranny  towards 
these  infants,  whom  Christ  hath  bought  with  his  precious 
blood,  and  by  Ihis  liis  lioly  Baptism  called  to  be  of  his 
tlock.""  Nothing  resembling  this  exorcism  remains  in 
the  present  service.  The  Gospel  and  the  Exhortation 
remain  as  they  were  at  first.  The  Lord's  Prayer  and 
the  Creed  follow  the  Exhortation  in  the  first  Liturgy, 
and  are  omitted  in  all  the  rest.  The  prayer  following 
has  remained  in  all  the  services  the  same.  Then  in  the 
first  Liturt:y,  the  Priest  was  directed  to  take  one  of  the 
children  by  the  right  hand — the  others  being  brought 
after  him — and  lead  him  into  the  church,  repeating  a 
benedictory  form  of  admission  into  the  Lord's  holy 
household.  The  font  was  then,  and  is  slill,  very  fre- 
quently in  England,  placed  by  the  door,  and  the  chil- 
dren were  brought  in  from  the  outer  porch.  The  address 
to  the  godfathers  and  godmothers  which  follows  has  but 
one  additional  phrase,  that  which  declares  that  the  in- 
fants must  fai'hl'ully  piomise  by  their  sureties,  "  until 
they  come  of  age  to  take  it  upon  themselves."  The 
questions  and  ansv.ers  which  follow,  are  broken  into 
smaller  portions  m  the  first  Liturgy,  and  the  Apostle's 
Creed  is  repeated.  The  questions  are  substantially  the 
same  in  the  English  and  our  present  service,  except  that 


*  It  being  ur£;ed  by  Bucer,  in  his  censure  of  the  Liturs;y,  that  this 
cxorci.-m  was  originally  used  lf>  none  hut  demoniacs,  and  that 
was  uncharitable  to  imngine  ihni  all  wore  demoniacs  who  came 
bapii-sm,  it  was  ihought  |  rudeni  by  our  Reformers  to  leave  it  out  ot 
the  Liturgy,  when  they  took  a  review  of  ii,  in  ilie  fifth  and  sixth  of 
Kinjr  Edward. — Wheatlet,  p-  367. 


252  INFANT    "BAPTISM. 

♦  be  word  renounce  i.s  used  instead  of  forsake.  An  im 
provpiTient  is  introduced  into  our  service,  by  addintr  to 
(lie  promise,  "Iwill,"  the  expression  "by  (jod's  help." 
The  benedictory  supplications  which  follow,  were  intro- 
duced into  the  second  Liturgy  of  Edward.  The  first 
rubric  which  followed  in  the  first  Liturgy,  directed  the 
child  to  be  dipped  in  the  water  three  times.  This 
trine  immersion,  as  it  was  called,  was  afterwards  omit- 
ted, an<l  permission  given,  if  the  child  were  weak,  to 
pour  water  upon  the  child,  instead  of  dij)ping  him.  Our 
rubric  allows  us  to  adopt  either  method.  In  the  first 
Liturgy,  the  minister  then  put  upon  the  child  the  "•  white 
vesture,  commonly  called  chrism,"  and  in  an  address 
to  the  child  bid  him  receive  it  as  "  a  token  of  the  inno- 
cence given  him  in  Baptism."  He  also  annointed  the 
child  in  token  of  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins,  and  the 
unction  of  the  Spirit.  Both  these  ceremonies  were  ujion 
the  next  revision  omitted.  They  ap])ear  to  have  beeji 
grounded  upon  the  discarded  doctrine  that  all  sin,  ori- 
ginal and  actual,  is  washed  away  in  Baptism.  The  con- 
clusion of  the  service,  as  it  stands  now,  is  foi  substance 
the  same  as  the  second  Liturgy  of  Edward. 

OiRGiN.  To  explain  the  origin  of  a  portion  of  this 
service,  it  will  be  necessary  to  refer  to  a  custom  in  the 
primitive  Church,  and  retained  in  the  English  Church 
prior  to  the  Reformation.  It  was  customary  to  introduce 
a  catechumen  or  candidate  for  Baptism,,  into  the  church 
by  a  certain  form  of  admission,  accompanied  by  certain 
rites.  They  were  signed  upon  the  forehead  with  the 
sign  of   the  cross;    exorcised;  anointed  with    oil,    and 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  '253 

pre.sentf^rl  with  ^all.  A  loiifjtli  ol"  linn-  inlervened  be- 
Iwppii  flirsc  iiiiliatfuy  rites,  and  the  i«(f|ilion  ot  the  .sa- 
(lainciil  of"  Baptism.  But  af"tei\var(l>  tliis  service  was 
a<l(lf*(l  to  and  adniiiiisteiefl  at  th(»  same  lime  with  that 
HajdisiTi,  even  in  the  case  ol"  infants.  The  absurdity  of 
admillinf^  inlants  as  catechunnens,  a>  those  who  were 
to  bf  lau^rht  |)reviously  to  being  baptized,  is  sufficiently 
iiiaiiilVst,  thoujjli  by  one  who  will  find  nothing  in  the 
pa>t  but  what  is  to  be  a(1mired,  it  is  di.-missed  with  this 
remark,  that  "it  is  not  easy  to  determine  the  exact 
rea-^ons"  tor  the  custom.'  The  introduction  to  our  Bap- 
tismal Olfice  is  said  to  be  derived,  in  some  measure, 
tliuugli  with  such  changes  as  make  it  suitable  to  a  Bap- 
tismal service,  from  that  l"or  the  admission  of  persons  as 
catechumens.  A  remnant  of  that  seivice  retained  in 
the  first  draught  of  the  Liturgy — namely,  the  signing 
of  the  child  with  the  cross — has  been  already  noticed. 
The  addiess  to  the  congregation  bears  great  resemblance 
to,  and  appears  to  have  been  borrowed  from,  one  in  use 
in  the  Archbishoj)ric  of  Cologne,  com{)Osed  by  Bucer 
and  Melancthon.  The  second  Collect  in  the  seivice,  is 
one  which  was  used  in  the  ancient  services  of  the 
English  Church.  The  portion  of  St.  Mark's  Gospel 
which  follows,  is  also  found  in  the  introductory  office 
for  making  a  catechujnen,  in  the  Churches  of  Salisbury 
and  York.  The  renunciation  of  Satan,  which,  in  our 
service,  is  merely  verbal,  was  anciently,  in  the  Eastern 
Church,  accompanied  by  a  turning  on  the  part  of  the 
candidate  to  the  west,  the  place  of  darkness  and  the 


'Palmer's  Antic|uiiies  of  English  Ritual,  vol.  ii,  p.  168. 


254  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

supposed  dwelling  of  Satan,  and  renouncing  him  with 
gestures  and  .spitting,  indicative  of  rejection  and  abhor- 
ence.  The  profession  of  faith  was  usually  made  by  a 
repetition  of  the  Creed.  The  benediction  and  the  con- 
secration of  the  waters,  are  in  forms  very  similar  to 
ours,  found  in  all  the  Eastern  and  Western  Churches. 
The  sign  of  the  cross  has  been  always  in  use  in  this 
service.  In  addition  to  it,  other  emblelSiatic  rites  were 
retained  in  the  early  church,  such  as  clothing  the  bap- 
tized in  white  raiment,  as  symbolical  of  purity  obtained 
through  Baptism;  giving  them  milk  and  honey,  as  rep- 
resenting their  new  taste  clnd  nature  as  babes  in  Christ; 
and  anointing  them  with  oil  as  emblematic  of  the 
unction  of  the  Spirit.  These  rites  were  properly  re- 
jected. The  other  portions  of  the  service,  whose  origin 
we  have  not  indicated,  were  probably  composed  by  the 
framers  of  the  Litiu'gy,  by  the  aid  of,  and  upon  the  model 
of,   some  of  the  continental  offices. 

We  sometimes  hear  the  Church  of  primitive  times 
referred  to  as  little  less  than  perfect  in  all  its  doctrines, 
jites,  and  its  pervading  spirit.  All  its  practices  are 
held  forth  as  worthy  of  devout  adoption.  Notwith- 
standing the  great  reverence  which  the  framers  of  our 
Liturgy  felt  for  the  early  Church — a  reverence  breathing 
through  all  their  writings,  and  conspicuous  in  the  Homi- 
lies— it  is  manifest  that  such  was  not  their  judgment. 
From  the  history  of  the  Baptismal  service,  it  is  clear 
that  they  have  placed  the  stainp  of  their  disapprobation 
u[)on  many  of  the  rites  almost  universally  prevalent  in 
the  primitive  Church.  And  a  mmd,  it  appears  to  me, 
must   be  strangely  constituted,  to  which   some  of  those 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  255 

rites  do  not  seem  gross  and  improper;  some  puerile  and 
tending  to  superstition;  and  some  based  upon  or  coun- 
tenancing erroneous  doctrine.  In  what  has  been  re- 
jected, and  what  has  been  retained  by  the  f'ramers  of 
our  service,  we  have  adchtional  proof  of  tJieir  wisdom, 
and  oi  the  j)resence  with  tlieni  of  that  Coil  who  guides 
minds,  whicJi  are  submissive  to  his  power,  into  all  truth. 
They  have  rejected,  as  we  have  seen,  the  introductory 
service  which  was  used  to  make  catechumens,  and  with 
it  the  anointing  with  oil,  the  exorcism,  and  the  pre- 
sentation of  salt,  with  which  it  was  accompanied.  The 
all  but  universal  ancient  custom  of  baptizing  persons, 
divested  of  all  clothing,  under  covered  baptistries;  the 
trine  immersion;  the  clothing  of  the  baptized  person 
with  a  chrism  or  white  garment;  the  anointing  of  him 
with  oil,  and  the  presentation  to  him  of  milk  and  honey 
to  eat,  are  all  omitted.  Here  are  eight  distinct  ceremo- 
nies or  customs  in  the  single  service  of  Baptism,  uni- 
versally prevalent  in  the  primitive  Church,  which  were 
rejected  by  the  framers  of  our  Liturgy.  And  this  they 
did  in  the  exercise  of  that  liberty  which  is  proclaimed 
in  our  XXXIVth  Article,  that  "it  is  not  necessary  that 
traditions  and  ceremonies  be  in  all  places  one  or  utterly 
alike."  On  the  contrary,  the  Church  of  Rome  has  re- 
tained and  multiplied  these  superstitious  and  puerile 
customs,  and  it  is  in  explaining  and  exalting  them,  that 
the  childish  rhetoric  of  its  writers,  suited  to  its  theme, 
grows  most  tawdry.  Says  Moehler,^  ''Symbol  iscrowrled 
upon  symbol,  in   (jrder  to   express  in  the   most  manifest 


'Symbolism,  p.  296. 


256  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

way  the  one  idea,  thai  a  total  permanent  change  is  to 
orciir  in  man,  aiid  a  new,  higher  aad  lasting  existence 
i^  hrncel'oi  ward  to  commence."  Yes,  alas!  symbol  is 
crowded  upon  symbol,  until  the  one  spiritual  idea  of"  a 
new  nature  disappeais  under  them,  instead  of  being 
maniiested //i/oM^/i  them;  some  of  these  symbols  having 
dug  its  grave,  while  others  stand,  pompous  and  boastful 
monuments,  over  the  place  of  its  departure. 

Beside  the  mere  act  of  Baptism,  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  we  retain  one  rite  which 
is  expressive  and  proper,  that  of  signing  the  child's  fore- 
head with  the  sign  of  the  cross,  in  token  of  his  conse- 
cration to  the  service  of  the  Crucified.  So  much  does 
this  significant  rite  commend  itself  to  the  minds  of  all, 
tijat  although  it  may  be  omitted  when  those  who  present 
the  child  shall  desire  it,  I  have  never  known  or  heard 
of  a  case  in  which  the  desire  to  have  it  omitted  has 
been  expressed  The  canons  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land," which  explains  the  lawful  use  of  the  sign  of  the 
cross,  declares  that  "it  is  no  part  of  the  substance  of 
that  Sacrament,"  that  "it  doth  not  add  any  thing  to  the, 
virtue  or  perfection  of  Baptism,  nor,  being  omitted,  doth 
detract  any  t-hing  from  the  effect  and  substance  of  it." 
We  retain  the  custom  of  sprinkling  or  pouring  instead 
of  imrhersion,  because  although  we  regard  immersion  as 
a  common  method  of  Baptism  in  the  Apostles'  days, 
and  th.)  e  immediately  succeeding,  we  do  not  regard 
that  particular  method  as  having  been  ever  enjoined  or 
always  practised,  or  as  essential  to  the  Sacrament.  The 


'"  Canons  of  the  Church,  228. 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  257 

words  translated  ''baptism  "  and  "baptize,"  which  are 
confidently  said  to  mean  vinilormly  immerse^  have  been 
critically  examined  by  a  ripe  scholar  of  our  own  l/hurch, 
and  the  result  is,  that  out  of  ninety-three  places  in 
which  the  words  occur,  they  have  the  sense  of  immer- 
sion in  but  two.*"  In  other  places  they  express  the 
meaning  to  dip  partially^  to  wet,  to  pour,  to  sprinkle. 
The  custom  of  having  godfathers  and  godmothers  is  a 
wise  and  kind  provision  for  the  training  of  children  in 
the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord.  In  our  attemjit 
to  develop  the  doctrinal  meaning  of  our  service,  the 
necessity  for  sponsors  will  be  apparent.  Indeed,  on 
what  we  regard  as  the  Church's  view  of  Infant  Baptism, 
the  provision  of  sponsors  is  essential  to  its  performance. 

If  Infant  Baptism  is  to  be  performed,  it  can  only  be, 
as  we  think,  upon  the  profes.sion  of  faith  and  penitence 
on  the  sponsors'  part.  Had  we  space,  then,  to  show 
that,  in  the  language  of  our  Article,  "the  Baptisin  of 
young  children  is  in  any  wise  to  be  retained  in  the 
church  as  most  agreeable  with  the  institution  of  Christ," 
we  should  in  so  doing  show  how  the  office  of  sponsors  is 
inseparably  and  necessarily  connected  with  it.  Taking 
for  granted,  at  this  time,  that  Infant  Baptism  was,  in 
the  design  of  Christ,  to  be  retained,  it  will  aj>pear  how 
necessary  a  j>arl  of  it  is  the  sponsors'  promises  and 
profession. 

The  meaning  and  intent  of  this  service  has  been  and 
is  a  subject  of  unceasing  discussion.  By  one  class  it 
has  been  represented  as  setting  forth  the  doctrine  that, 

*^  Chapin's  Primitive  Church. 


258  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

in  and  by  virtue  ol"  Baptism,  as  instituted  by  Christ,  the 
child  receives  the  remission  of  his  original  sin,  and  a 
signed  and  sealed  admission  into  the  privileges  of  the 
covenant  of  redemption — privileges  secured  to  him  in 
the  act  of  Baptism,  and  extended  to  him  as  soon  as  he 
is  capable  of  receiving  them.  By  another  class,  the 
service  is  regarded  a-»  teaching  not  merely  the  remis- 
sion, but  the  removal,  of  original  sin;  not  only  the 
secured  admission  to  the  privileges  of  heaverdy  citizen- 
ship, but  such  an  actual  reception  of  transforming  grace 
as  makes  the  infant  to  be  born  again,  by  a  change  of 
his  mora!  nature.  Upon  a  subject  so  much  controverted, 
we  can  hope,  in  the  brief  space  that  remains,  to  do 
litUc  more  than  express  our  own  strong  convictions, 
and  leave  the  brieily  indicated  giounds  of  those  convic- 
tions to  the  further  examination  and  retlection  of  the 
reader. 

Much  of  the  perplexity  upon  this  subject  has  aiisen, 
we  believe,  from  the  different  senses  in  which  the  word 
"  Baptism"  is  used.  In  Scripture,  we  find  it  generally 
used  in  one  of  three  ditTerent  senses.  Sometimes  it 
means  the  outward  rite  of  Baptism,  sometimes  the  in- 
ward change,  the  new  nature  given  by  grace  through 
the  exercise  of  faith  in  Christ  and  repentance  towards 
(iod,  of  which  outward  Baptism  is  the  sign  and  seal.  At 
other  times,  it  is  used  in  a  sense  which  embraces  both 
(he  outward  sign  and  the  thing  signified.  This  is  a 
[)omt  very  important  to  be  borne  in  mind.  An  example 
of  the  first  sense  is  found  in  the  address  of  St.  Peter, 
upon  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  he  said,  "  Repent, 
every  one  of  you.,  and  be  baptized."  John  the  Baptist's 


INFANT     BAPTISM.  209 

derlaratinn,  that  the  Saviour  >li()ul(l  l>apti/t'  with  the 
Holy  fihost  and  with  fire,  is  an  example  of  the  second 
sense.  The  declaration  of  St.  Peter,  that  "  Baptism 
doth  now  save  us,"  is  an  example  of  the  last  sense,  in 
which  both  the  sign  and  the  thing  signified  are  included, 
as  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that  he  adds,  it  is  not  the 
outward  part,  but  the  inward,  which  brings  us  into  a 
state  of  salvation  ;  ''  not  the  puttina:  away  of  the  filth  of 
the  Hesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good  conscience  towards 
(rod."  And  yet  it  was  not  the  inward  part,  as  discon- 
nected from,  hut  as  united  to  the  inward,  which  saves. 
Roth  the  outward  sigii  and  the  inward  grace,  then,  are, 
meant,  whfMi  it  is  said,   "  Baptism  doth  save  us." 

Now  it  will  be  granted,  that  when  Baptism  is  spoken 
oi'  in  Scripture,  as  the  initiatory  rite  into  the  Church  of 
Chri>t,  it  has  leference  generally  to  the  baptism  of  adults. 
At  the  first  promulgation  of  Christianity,  it  was  of  ne- 
cessity adults  w'ho  were  first  admitted  into  the  Church. 
Wherever  outward  Baptism  is  mentioned  in  connection 
with  adults,  it  is  ever  spoken  of,  not  as  the  means  by 
whicli  the  inner  Baptism,  the  converted  heart,  was  to  be 
obtained,  hut  as  that  which  was  to  follow  that  inner  Bap- 
tism, as  il^  expressive  sign  and  its  attesting  seal.  Such 
we  find  to  have  been  the  case  with  the  covenant  seal  of 
CJod,  even  under  a  less  spiritual  dispensation.  The  rite 
of  circumcision  held  the  same  place  under  the  Jewish, 
as  Bapli~in  under  the  Christian,  dispensation.  St.  Paul 
tells  us,  that  "  Abraham  received  the  sign  of  circumci- 
sion— not  as  the  instrument  of  imparting  to  him  righte- 
ousness— but  as  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  which  he 
had,  yet  being  uncircumcised,"     This  is  the  uniform 


260  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

(estimony  ol  the  New  Te.staiuent.  It  is  by  tife  Word, 
hy  faith  in,  Christ,  that  the  soul's  new  birth  is  said  to  be 
effected,  and  tlien  Baptism  is  applied  as  its  sign  and  seal. 
"  Whosoever  beUeveth  that  .Jesus  is  the  Christ,  is  born 
ol  God."  The  three  thousand  who  were  converted, 
under  the  preaching  of  St.  Peter,  were  pricked  to  the 
heart  or  convicted  of  sin,  and  gladly  received  the  Word — 
both  of  these  being  the  effects  of  the  Holy  Spirit — and 
were  then  baptized.  Cornehu.>  and  the  Gentiles  with 
him,  after  there  was  poured  out  upon  them  the  gift  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  were  then  baptized  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord.  The  jailer  was  bidden  by  the  Apostles,  when  he 
asked  them  what  he  must  do  to  be  saved,  not  to  be  bap- 
tized, that  he  might  be  made  regenerate,  but  to  "  be- 
lieve in  the  Lord  .lesus  Christ,  and  he  should  be  saved." 
After  hearing  the  Word  of  God,  he  and  his  household 
were  baptized.  The  Ethiopian  eunuch  was  assured, 
tliat  if  lie  believed  Jesus  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  he  might 
be  baptized.  Now,  when  we  are  told  that  none  can  be- 
lieve Jesus  to  be  the  Son  of  God  but  by  the  Spirit,  we 
find  in  this  instance,  also,  that  the  "  spiritual  baptism 
preceded,  or  was  profes.sed  to  have  preceded,  the  bap- 
tism of  water."  We  take  it,  therefore,  as  an  established 
Scriptural  principle,  that  in  Adult  Baptism,  the  inner 
and  spiritual  washing  preceded  that  outward  baptism, 
which  was  its  significant  symbol  and  its  appropriate 
seal. 

And  now  we  come  to  advert  to  the  fact  already  no- 
ticed, that  Baptism  is  often  used  in  Scripture  as  expres- 
sive both  of  the  outward  sign  and  the  inward  grace. 
"  By  a  common  figure  of  speech,  also,  that  is  sometimes 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  261 

attributed  to  the  outward  rite,  which  belongs  either  to 
the  inward  grace  alone,  or  to  the  inward  grace  and  the 
outward  sign  together."  Having  learned  from  Scrip- 
ture histoi-y  that  the  inward  grace  precedes  the  outward 
sign,  we  are  not  liable  to  explain  passages  in  which  this 
cotnplex  use,  or  this  use  of  one  part  for  the  whole,  of  the 
word  "  baptism"  occurs,  as  teaching  that  the  outward 
rile  precedes  the  inward  grace  as  its  cause  ;  but  that,  al- 
though thus  mentioned,  the  relation  between  them  is 
that  indicated  by  such  Scripture  as  we  have  adduced. 
Now  here  are  the  simple  principles — and  the  more  they 
are  tested  by  Scripture  the  more  evident  will  they  be — 
by  means  of  which  all  the  language  of  Scripture  receives 
an  easy  and  consistent  explanation.  Does  Ananias  say 
to  Paul,  "  Arise,  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  away  thy 
sins  ?"  We  do  not  conclude  that  a  new  doctrine  meets 
lis  here,  and  that  the  outward  baptism  is  the  means  by 
which  sins  are  washed  away.  We  believe  the  Scripture 
harmonizes  with  all  the  rest.  Turning  to  the  history  of 
St.  Paul's  conversion,  we  find  that  Ananias  was  sent  to 
him  by  .Jesus,  that  he  might  receive  his  sight,  and  be 
filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost.  Then,  he  arose  and  was 
baptized.  When  Ananias  thus  bid- him  to  arise  and  be 
baptized  and  wash  away  his  sins,  he  used  baptism  in 
the  sen.se  of  that  completing  ordinance,  by  which  the 
washing  away  of  sins,  which  was  effected  by  faith  in 
Christ,  would  be  symbolized  and  visibly  attested  and 
secured  by  God's  established  seal.  And  thus  when- 
ever, in  Scripture,  baptism  is  connected  with  the  remis- 
sion of  sins  and  with  .spiritual  regeneration,  it  will  be 
found  either  to  include  the  idea  of  both  the  inward  and 


262  INFANT    BAPTISM.* 

outward  baptism  ;  or,  it  it  be  expressive  of  the  outer 
rite,  it  will  be  found  to  be  on  the  supposition,  or  in  con- 
nection with  the  fact,  that  it  has  been  or  is  to  be  pre- 
ceded by  the  inner  spiritual  baptism.  Such  various  use 
of  the  word  is  natural,  and  has  its  numerous  analogies 
in  social  and  civil  life.  I  might  speak  of  the  inaugura- 
tion of  the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  truly  say 
it  conferred  upon  him  no  powers  as  President.  Then  I 
should  speak  of  it  as  a  mere  outward  act,  which  could 
have  been  of  no  force  or  benefit,  but  for  his  previous 
election  by  the  people,  in  accordance  with  the  provi- 
sions of  the  Constitution.  The  ceremony  did  not  con- 
fer, but  signified,  sealed  and  formed  the  initiatory  mode 
of  his  entrance  upon  the  possession  of  a  power  already 
his  by  the  Constitution  and  the  people's  will.  Or  I 
might  truly  say,  that  his  inauguration  conferred  upon 
him  the  power  of  President  ol  the  United  States  ;  and 
then  I  should  use  the  word  as  expressive,  of  the  com- 
pleting ceiemony  which,  in  connection  with  wirat  h;ul 
gone  before,  was  a  significant  outward  method  of  for- 
mally, finally,  solemnly,  investing  him,  upon  his  taking 
the  oath  required  by  the  Constitution,  with  that  posses- 
sion— namely,  the  power  and  prerogative  of  his  otiice  — 
which  had  previously  been  conferred  upon  him,  but 
which  he  could  not  enjoy  iintil  this  ceremony  hud  taken 
place.  So  in  Scripture,  we  find  that  Ba])tism,  the  mere 
outward  rite,  is  said  not  to  convey  salvation  ;  "  not  Wif 
putting  away  of  the  filth  of  the  Mesh,'''  l)y  the  outwanl 
rite,  "saves  us,"  says  ^t.  Paul.  i>ut  Raptisni  saves 
when  it  is  tl)(»  anssver  of  a  good  coiiscience  towards 
God.      That  is,  when  llit-  outward  ritr  has  been  preceded 


INFANT   BAPTISM.  263 

by  the  inward  grace,  then  we  say  it  saves  us;  as  when 
inauguration  has  been  preceded  by  a  right  election,  it 
may  be  said  to  convey,  to  him  who  is  elected,  the 
powers  and  prerogatives  of  President  ot"  the  United 
States. 

Now,  with  one  additional  remark  with  regard  to  Bap- 
tism as  described  in  the  Bible,  we  shall  be  prepared  to 
examine  the  services  and  teachings  of"  the  Church  upon 
the  subject. 

It  is  found  that  many  of  the  cases  of  Baptism,  men- 
tioned in  Scripture,  are  accompanied,  or  enjoined  with, 
or  followed  by,  the  promise  of  the  bestowal  of  the  Holy 
Gho^t.  This  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  to  be  distin- 
guished from  the  precedent  gift  of  the  Spirit  which  pro- 
duced the  work  of  penitence  and  faith  in  the  sinner's 
soul.  It  was  usually  in  the  Apostles'  days  a  miraculous 
gift  of  tongues  or  miracles,  and  no  doubt  was  accompa- 
nied by  the  sanctifying  grace  which  ever  renews  the 
soul  into  a  completer  image  of  the  Master. 

Turning  to  the  Church,  we  find  these  views  of  Scrip- 
ture corroborated  to  our  minds,  by  observing  the  same 
language  upon  the  subject  of  Baptism,  as  we  find  in 
the  Word  of  God.  The  authoritative  doctrine  of  the 
Church  upon  the  subject  is  found  in  her  Articles. 
The  XXVIIth, '<of  Baptism,"  reads  as  follows:  ''Bap- 
tism is  not  only  a  sign  of  profession  and  mark  of  difler- 
ciue  whereby  Christian  men  are  discerned  from  others 
tir.tt  be  not  christened,  but  it  is  also  a  sign  of  regene- 
ration or  new  birth,  whereby,  as  an  instrument,  they 
that  rfceive  Baptism  ri'^litly  are  gralted  into  Christ's 
Church;  the  promises  ot  the  forgiveness  of  sins  and  of 


264  INFANT   BAPTISM. 

our  adoption  to  be  the  sons  of  God  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
are  visibly  signed  and  sealed;  faith  is  confirmed,  and 
grace  increased,  by  virtue  "of  prayer  to  God."  Now 
here  that  outward  Baptism  which  follows  the  inward,  is 
described  in  exact  conformity  with  what  we  have  found 
to  be  the  Scripture  statement.  It  is  a  badge  of  Chris- 
tian profession.  It  is  a  sign  of  regeneration  or  new 
birth.  Not  its  cause,  but  its  sign;  the  sign  of  that 
which  has  preceded  it;  namely,  a  new  birth  unto  right- 
eousness. It  is  an  instrument,  not  by  which  we  are 
born  again,  but  by  which  they  who  receive  Baptism 
rightly — that  i^,  as  is  evident  by  comparing  this  Article 
with  the  XXVth,  they  who  worthily  and  in  faith  receive 
the  same — are  grafted  into  the  Church.  The  promises 
of  forgiveness  of  sins  and  of  adoption  to  be  the  sons  of 
God  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  not,  be  it  observed,  then 
first  fulfilled,  but  are  then  visibly  signed  and  sealed. 
Faith  is  not  then  given.,  but  having  been  previously 
exercised  to  the  soul's  justification,  is  confirmed.  Grace 
is  increased,  not  because  it  comes  through  the  Sacra- 
ment as  itself  a  channel  of  conveyance,  but  hy  virtue 
of  prayer  to  God.  Turning  to  the  Catechism,  we  find, 
in  reply  to  ^he  question,  '^IV/iat  is  required  of  persons 
to  be  baptizedV  the  answer:  "Repentance,  whereby 
they  forsake  sin;  and  faith,  whereby  they  steadfastly 
believe  the  promises  of  God  made  to  them  in  that  -Sa- 
crament." Repentance  and  faith,  then — the  gifts  of 
the  Spirit — are  to  precede  Baptism.  Thus  the  Prayer- 
Book  harmonizes  with  the  Bible  in  the  statement  that 
repentance  and  faith  must  precede  Baptism;  and  that 
theji  Baptism  is  to  be  administered  as  a  badge  of  Chris- 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  265 

tian  profession;  a  sign  of  regeneration;  an  instrument, 
rightly  used,  of  being  grafted  into  the  Church;  a  visible 
sign  and  seal  of  the  promises  of  foigiveness  aiid  adop- 
tion; a  means  for  the  confirmation  of  faith  and  the  in- 
crease of  grace,  by  virtue  of  prayer  to  God. 

We  have  reached,  at  length,  the  Baptismal  Service 
for  infants.  The  question  is,  Is  there  such  a  change  iu 
the  nature  of  Ba])tism,  when  applied  to  infants,  that  it 
ceases  to  be  a  sign  and  seal  in  the  same  sense  as  it  was 
before?  Does  it  now  so  change  its  nature,  as  that  it  is 
not  a  sign  and  seal  of  something  that  goes  before;  but 
that  it  is,  first,  the  cause  of  spiritual  regeneration,  and 
then  its  siojn  and  seal?  Now  if  there  be  such  a  change 
in  the  nature  of  Baptism  when  applied  to  infants,  we 
might  confidently  expect  to  find  it  noticed  in  our  Article 
on  that  subject.  But  as  the  Article  concludes  with  only 
the  assertion,  ''that  Infant  Baptism  is  to  be  retained  in 
the  Church,"  we  are  left  to  apply  all  it  says  about 
Baptism  to  that  of  infants.  No  distinction  between 
them  is  pointed  out  to  us.  But  they  who  contend 
that  infants  are  really  regenerated,  by  a  change  of 
their  moral  nature,  in  Baptism,  as  its  source,  or  cause^ 
or  instrument,  do  overthrow  all  the  statements  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  do  run  counter  to  all  the  definitions  of  the 
Liturgy,  in  making  the  inner  grace  succeed,  instead  of 
precede,  the  outer  sign.  It  is  said^hat  because  infants 
are  incapable  of  repentance  and  faith,  therefore  it  is 
impossible  that  it  should  be  exhibited;  and,  therefore, 
preposterous  that  a  profession  of  it  should  be  required. 
Nevertheless,  this  profession  is  required  before  infants 
can  be  baptized.  Our  Reformers  seem  to  have  come 
12 


266  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

to  the  formation  of  our  Liturgy  with  this  principle  deeply 
fixed.  '^'No  repentance  and  faith,  then  no  Baptism. 
Nothing  signified,  then  no  sign."  They  require  some- 
thing to  precede  the  sign  in  Infant,  as  they  do  in  Adult, 
Baptism.  It  is  the  same  thing  they  require  in  both — re- 
pentance and  faith.  In  the  case  of  adults,  it  is  a  pro- 
fession of  their  own  belief  and  penitence.  In  the  case 
of  infants,  it  is  a  profession  on  the  part  of  sponsors. 
Here  we  see  the  truth  of  the  remark,  that  the  office 
of  sponsor  is  inseparable  from  the  rite  of  Infant  Baptism. 
In  the  latter  case  something  precedes  Baptism,  as  well 
as  in  the  former.  It  is  a  spiritual  life,  not  in  possession, 
but  in  promise;  it  is  repentance  and  faith,  not  exercised, 
but  guaranteed.  The  children  of  believers  are  born 
with  a  title  to  the  inheritance  of  their  fathers.  Such 
we  suppose  to  be  the  import  of  the  Apostle's  declara- 
rations,  that  the  children  of  a  believing  wife  are  holy; 
and  such  the  compass  of  the  assertion  that  the  promise 
to  the  Jews,^  spoken  of  by  St.  Peter,  is,  to  them  and  their 
children.  The  parents  or  sponsors  treat  with  God  on 
their  behalf  The  sponsors  must  present  the  infant  as 
a  believer,  and  promise,  on  its  part,  that  it  will  act  and 
appear  as  such  w^hen  capable  of  so  doing,  and  of  a 
practical  manifestation  of  its  principle,  and  exhibition  of 
its  profession.  The  Church  will  not  ba])tize  till  this 
promise  has  been  rrfSde, — distinctly  and  solemnly  made. 
With  one  voice  her  service  for  adults  and  for  infants 
proclaims  that  faith  nnist  precede  Baptism,  or  Baptism 
cannot  be  administered.^ 


'We  also  infer  that  infants  should  be  offered  to  God  in  Baptism, 
upon  the  faith  of  the  parent  or  master,  because  the  blessings  which 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  267 

This  view  of  the  subject  is  confirmed  by  the  language 
of  the  Catechism.  After  the  answer  that  repentance 
and  faith  are  required  of  those  who  are  to  be  baptized, 
the  question  is  a:«ked,  "Why,  the«,  are  infants  baptized, 
when,  by  reason  of  their  tender  age,  they  cannot  per- 
form them?"  "Why,  then?"  Observe,  it  is  a  question 
of  surprise  and  of  objection.  It  involves  this  objection. 
If  repentance  and  faith  are  indispensable,  why  are  in- 
fants who  cannot  exercise  them,  baptized?  Now,  mark 
the  answer  !  The  difficulty  is  met,  not  by  saying  that 
in  the  case  of  Infant  Baptism  the  child  has  given  to 
him  the  inner  grace  ;  not  by  the  assertion  that  Baptism 
will  convey  those  graces,  but  by  the  recognition  and  ac- 
ceptance of  the  profession  of  others  instead  of  his  own  ; 
by  accepting  the  proxy  for  the  principal.  Infants  are 
baptized,  it  is  answered,  because  they  promise  both 
repentance  and  faith.  They  promise  them  by  their 
sureties."*  It  deserves  particular  notice,  that  repentance 

Christ  conferred  upon  men,  were  frequently  given  to  children  and 
servants  on  the  faith  of  the  parents  or  master.  Thus  the  servant 
of  the  Centurion  was  healed  on  the  faith  of  his  master.  (Matt  viii.) 
The  Rabbi's  daughter  was  restored  to  life  and  health  on  account  of 
her  father's  faith,  (Luke  viii;)  and  the  woman  of  Samaria,  by  her 
faith,  obtained  the  like  blessings  for  her  daughter.  (Matt,  xx.) 
And  the  little  children  on  whom  Christ  bestowed  his  blessing,  were 
presented  to  him  on  the  faith  of  believing  parents.  In  view  of 
these,  and  many  other  facts  of  a  similar  character,  it  is  impossible 
for  us  to  see  how  any  servant  of  Christ  can  drive  from  his  allar, 
and  reject  from  his  covenant,  those  to  whom  he  extended  those 
blessings  while  on  earth,  and  of  whom  he  said,  "of  such  are  the 
kingdom  of  God." — Chapin's  Primitive  Church,  p.  83. 

**  Accommodat  mater  ecclesia  aliorum  pedes  ut  veniant,  aliorum 
cor  ut  credant,  aliorum  linguam  ul  fateanlur.  The  Church  provides 


268  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

and  faith  are  not  promised  for  children,  as  the  conse- 
quence of,  but  as  the  qualijicatinn  for,  Baptism.  The 
Church  asserts  expressly,  that  in  every  case,  without 
exception,  repentance  and  faith  are  required  as  pre- 
requisites ;  and  then  she  proceeds  to  show  upon  what 
principle  infants  can  be  regarded  as  possessed  of  these 
graces,  and  entitled  to  the  rite.'' 

But  there  is  a  passage  in  the  Baptismal  Service,  which 
is  supposed  to  teach  the  doctrine,  that  in  Baptism  the 
soul  of  the  child  is  spiritually  transformed,  and  that  the 
inward  and  spiritual  grace  follows  the  outward  sign,  as 
its  cause.  The  passage  is  this:  "  We  yield  thee  hearty 
thanks,  most  merciful  Father,  that  it  hath  pleased 
thee  to  regenerate  this  infant  with  thy  Holy  Spirit,  to 
receive  him  for  thine  own  child  by  adoption,  and  to  in- 

that  they  may  come  with  the  feet  of  others,  believe  with  the  heart 
of  others,  confess  with  the  tongue  of  others.  ' 

AuGDSTINE  DE  VeRBIS  ApOSTOHS. 

*It  is  not  they  (the  sponsors)  that  promise  these  things  for  them- 
selves ;  neither,  indeed,  do  they  promise  that  the  child  shall  do 
them  ;  but  it  is  the  child  that  promises  these  things  by  them.  It  is 
not  their  duty,  by  virtue  of  that  promise,  but  his.  Indeed,  they 
ought  to  contribute  their  best  help  and.  a.ssistance  thereunto ;  but 
that  is  all  that  is  incumbent  on  them;  which,  if  they,  have  done, 
and  the  child  prove  notoriously  wicked,  they  have  not  thereby 
broken  any  covenant,  but  only  he  himself-,  for  in  entering  upon 
those  holy  engagements  they  bore  the  person  of  the  infant,  and 
their  stipulation  is  legally  his,  so  that  they  leave  him  obliged  to 
perform  what  in  his  name  is  promised,  which,  if  he  performs,  eter- 
nal life  will  be  his  i-eward ;  if  not,  eternal  death.  They  lay  this 
engagement  upon  the  child  as  parents,  and  those  deputed  by  parents 
may  do;  leaving  him  to  fulfil  the  covenant  or  to  transgress  it  at  his 
own  peril. — Bishop  Hopkins  (of  Derry)  on  the  Two  Covenants,  p. 
139. 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  269 

corporate  him  in  thy  holy  Church."  Some  people 
seem  to  apprehend  that  there  is  a  mysterious  and 
indefinite  responsibility  resting  upon  those  who  pro- 
mise in  the  name  of  children,  and  they  feel  reluct- 
ance in  taking  it  upon  themselves.  I  therefore  re- 
peat, that  the  sponsor  promises  .nothing  in  his  own 
name  ;  he  only  expresses,  in  suitable  words,  how  the 
child,  as  he  grows  up,  ought  to  live,  or  what  is  required 
of  man  in  the  Christian  covenant.  But  there  are  two 
things  which  the  Church  requires  of  sponsors,  and 
which,  though  they  do  not  promise  or  engage  to  do 
them,  are  supposed  to  be  their  duty.  The  one  is,  to 
see  that  the  child  is  seasonably  instructed  in  the  ludi- 
ments  of  religion;  and  the  other,  that  he  is  presented 
for  Confirmation.  These  are  two  distinct  things,  and 
should  not  be  confounded  together.  The  sponsor's  chief 
duty  is  to  see  that  the  child  is  suitably  instructed  in  the 
nature  of  Baptism,  and  of  Confirmation,  and  the  doc- 
trines of  Christ.  And  it  often  is  the  case,  that  the  parent 
has  done  all  his  duty,  long  before  the  child  or  person  is 
confirmed.  There  may  be  no  opportunities  for  Confir- 
mation, or  the  child,  when  grown  up,  may  not  be  reli- 
gious: he  may  unhappily  turn  from  the  holy  command- 
ment given  unto  him.  In  such  cases  the  sponsor  has 
done  his  duty,  and  is  no  longer  bound.  You  are  not 
required  b}'  the  Saviour,  or  by  his  Church,  to  do  more 
than  what  is  reasonably  withm  your  power  to  prepare 
the  child  for  Confirmation.  Having  done  it,  though  he 
should  lose  his  soul,  you  will  not  lose  your  reward.  You 
see,  too,  from  what  has  been  said,  that  children  bap- 
tized as  some  are  in  private,  or  by  those  Christiaas  who 


270  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

do  not  require  any  responses,  may  still,  as  in  our  Cate- 
chism, and  in  the  Office  for  Confirmation,  be  considered 
as  having  promised  by  their  sureties^  or  by  those  who 
presented  them  tor  Baptism;  because  they  who  bring 
children  to  Baptism  are  the  instruments  of  placing  them 
under  that  obligation,  equally  and  precisely  the  same, 
whether  they  express  it  by  words  or  not. — Bishop 
Griswold,  ^^ Sponsor  in  Baptism^''  in  the  '■''Select  Family 
and  Parish  Ser'iions,  vol.  ii,  p.  221.  N)w,  bear  in 
mind  that  if  this  be  the  true  meaning  of  the  service, 
then  it  teaches  two  distinct  and  opposite  rules  on  the 
subject  of  Baptism,  while  Scripture  gives  but  one  ;  nay, 
while  the  Article  and  Catechism  give  but  one.  If  this 
be  the  meaning  of  the  expression,  then  this  service 
teaches  that  repentance  and  faith  are  to  follow  Baptism, 
while  the  Article  and  Catechism  assert  that,  in  all  cases, 
they  are  to  precede :  sometimes  personally,  in  those  who 
are  to  be  baptized  ;  sometimes  vicariously,  in  the  per- 
sons of  the  sponsors.  But  Itjt  us  look  at  the  passage. 
You  observe  that*  the  child's  faith  and  repentance  are 
not  actually  his  own,  but  are  supposed  and  imputed. 
As  the  inner  grace  preparatory  to  Baptism  is  in  sup- 
posed or  reckoned  possession,  so,  correspondently,  the 
blessing  prayed  for  is  assumed  as  having  been  given  ;  it 
is  in  supposed  and  reckoned  possession  also.  All  that 
it  is  possible  for  the  child,  by  reason  of  his  tender  age, 
to  have — namely,  the  substituted  faith  of  his  sponsors — 
he  possesses,  and  is,  therefore,  regarded  by  the  Church 
as  coming  with  the  spiritual  graces  required  for  Baptism. 
All  that  it  is  possible  for  him,  by  reason  of  the  same 
tender  age,  to  receive,  he  does  receive ;  and  he  is  there- 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  271 

fore  regarded  and  pronounced  by  the  Church  to  have 
received  that  full  blessing  which  belongs  to  the  full 
baptism  of  the  spirit.  As  he  is  assumed  to  exercise 
repentance  and  faith,  before  it  is  possible  for  him  per- 
sonally to  exercise  them,  so  he  is  assumed  to  receive 
the  full  blessings  of  a  complete  Baptism,  before  it  is 
possible  for  him  to  receive  them.  Therefore  the  Church 
speaks  of  the  baptized  child,  without  hesitation,  as  re- 
generate. Therefore,  in  the  Catechism,  the  child  speaks 
of  his  Baptism  as  that  wherein  he  was  made  a  member 
of  Christ,  a  child  of  God,  and  an  inheritor  of  the  king- 
dom of  heaven.  They  are  all  assumed  as  his,  because 
they  are  all  his  by  secure  and  sealed  promises,  upon  the 
exercise  of  faith  and  penitence  on  his  part.  If  he  fulfils 
the  sponsors'  profession,  he  will  enter  upon  the  posses- 
sion of  the  signed  and  sealed  inheritance.  If  not,  he 
will  forfeit  it.  I^  an  estate  be  made  over  to  a  minor,  on 
conditions  and  promises  made  for  him  by  his  guardian, 
we  speak  of  the  estate  as  the  possession  of  that  minor. 
It  is  his  right,  by  covenant,  by  a  signed  and  sealed  com- 
pact. But  if  he  violate  the  condition,  he  forfeits  the 
possession.'"     Until  he  does  violate  the  condition,  it  is, 

"'There  is  another  method  of  explainina^  the  Baptismal  .service  for 
infants,  which  avoidg  the  doctrine  of  an  absolute  and  invariable 
moral  change  in  the  case  of  all  baptized  children,  which  has  been 
adopted  by  many  holy  and  distinguished  men.  It  is  very  fairly 
presented  in  the  admirable  little  work  of  Bishop  Mead,  entitled 
"  Letters  to  a  mother  on  the  birth  of  a  child;"  and  a  portion  of  his 
statement  on  the  subject  is  here  appended  in  justice  to  the  large  and 
respectable  number  of  persons,  by  whom  this  view  is  held.  Indeed, 
it  will  be  seen  by  the  latter  extract,  which  we  subjoin,  that  the 
American  Church  bad  nearly  committed  itself  to  this  interpretation. 


272  INFANT  BAPTISM. 

and  we  do  not  hesitate  to  speak  of  it,  as  his ;  his,  not 
in  promise  only,  but  in  reality.    In  a  similar  sense  does 

Nevertheless,  we  abide,  with  strong  convictions,  by  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  text. 

"  In  order  to  the  morecomfortableandedifyinguseof  the  service, 
and  that  your  mind  may  not  be  offended  by  the  terms  employed  on 
that  interesting  occasion,  let  me  state  what  are  the  leading  interpreta- 
tions which  may  with  safety  and  a  good  conscience  be  adopted,  and 
what  are  untrue  and  dangerous  in  the  opinion  of  the  friend  who  ad- 
dresses you. 

"  1st.  The  first  method  of  interpreting  the  term  regeneration,  is 
that  wliich  supposes  it  to  refer  to  certain  religious  privileges  and 
advantages  assured  to  us  in  Baptism,  by  the  right  use  of  which 
privileges  we  may,  through  God's  grace,  be  renewed  in  the  spirit  of 
our  minds,  but  which  are  not  themselves  that  moral  change.  W« 
are  said  to  be  regenerated  because  placed  in  the  midst  of  such  ad- 
vantages. It  is  argued  by  the  advocates  of  this  view  that  the  term 
regeneration  is  to  be  found  in  but  two  places  of  Scripture,  and  only 
in  one  of  these  in  connexion  with  Baptism,  and  then  distinguished 
from  the  renewal  of  the  heart  by  the  Spirit.  In  the  Epistle  of  St 
Paul  to  Titus,  we  are  said  to  be  saved  '  by  the  washing  of  regenera- 
tion and  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost;'  the  former  term  being  gen- 
erally ascribed  to  Baptism,  or  being  born  again  of  water,  and  the 
latter  to  the  birth,  to  the  Spirit.  It  is  therefore  said  that  the  term  is 
to  be  understood  in  a  lower  sense  than  that  in  which  many  now 
understand  it."     P.  66- '7. 

"The  good  old  Bishop  Flopkins  of  the  Irish  Church,  has  adopted 
and  defended  this  view.  Archbishop  Tillotson  not  only  advocates 
it,  and  thinks  that  no  one  need  have  scruples  as  to  using  the  Episco- 
pal service,  but  maintains  that  the  Continental  Churches  thus  under- 
stood Baptismal  regeneration  as  used  in  (heir  confessions. 

"  Many  of  the  old  English  divines,  as  also  of  the  more  modern 
may  be  classed  with  the  above. 

"  In  the  American  Episcopal  Church  I  might  mention  Bishops 
Griswold  and  Hobart,  the  latter  of  whom  has  maintained  it  in  va. 
rious  publications,  but  especially  in  his  explanation  of  the  Church 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  273 

fhe  Church  regard  the  child  as  regenerate,  as  adopted, 
as  incorporated  into  the  Church." 

And  now  we  bring  this  discussion  to  a  close,  con" 
scious  that  much  has  been  left  unsaid  that  might  have 
thrown  light  on  this  much  controverted  subject.  The 
Church  is  found  to  teach  one  doctrine  upon  Baptism, 
n  the  case  of  the  penitent  adult,  it  is  fully  carried  out 
in  reality,  in  the  case  of  the  infant,  it  is  carried  out  in 
reality,  so  far  as  the  nature  of  the  infant  will  allow, 
and  by  substitution  and  supposed  possession  of  the 
prerequisites,  which  it  cannot  personally  possess;  and 
by  the  sealed  and  covenanted  title  to  that  part  of 
the  blessing,  which  it  cannot  personally,  as  yet,  enjoy. 
Sumrr.ing  up,  then,  the  benefits  or  blessings  connected 
with  infant  Baptism,  we  find  they  are  as  follows: 

1.  In  it  there  i-  a  remission  of  original  sin — not  the 
entire  destruction  of  it — (for,  according  to  our  Articles, 


Catechisi.i.  The  fullest  and  clearest  exhibition  of  it,  however, 
may  be  seen  in  a  little  volume,  entitled  "  Regeneration,"  by  the 
late  Bishop  of  Pennsylvania.  To  these  there  should  be  added  the 
fact,  that  in  the  General  Convention,  1836,  the  Bishops  proposed 
certain  changes  in  the  coiilirmation  service,  havnig  in  view  the  cor- 
rection of  injuriovis  imsiifiprehensions  as  to  the  meaning  of  certain 
terms  in  that  office,  he.  iriiij;  on  this  very  subject  of  Baptismal  regen- 
eration. The  object  and  effect  of  those  changes  would  have  been 
to  establish  this  view  as  the  sense  of  the  Church  in  America.  But 
though  the  changes  were  passed  unanimously  by  the  Bishops,  and 
by  a  large  majority  of  the  lower  house,  it  was  deemed  advisable  by 
Bi.shop  Hoitari,  the  mover  of  them,  to  withdraw  the  same,  as  they 
were  cfmnecied  with  other  proposed  changes  in  the  service,  which 
gave  dissatisfaction  to  many  in  the  Church."     P.  76-'7. 

"  "  The  effects  of  Baptism  depends  neither  upon  their  own  present 
actual  faith  and  repentance  (which  the  Catechism  says  expressly  they 
12» 


274  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

the  infection  of  a  corrupted  nature  doth  remain  even  in 
the  regenerate) — to  baptized  infants  as  well  as  to 
adults. 

2.  It  is  a  badge  of  a  Christian  profession. 

3.  It  is  a  symbol  of  the  spiritual  regeneration. 

4.  It  is  the  initiatory  rite  into  the  Church  of  God, 
where  the  infant  is  surrounded  with  the  means  of  grace, 
and  met,  at  the  first  moment  of  its  moral  accountability, 
with  the  promised  and  pledged  as!>istance  of  heaven. 

5.  It  is  a  covenanting  and  sealing  ordinance,  in 
which  the  forgiveness  of  all  sins,  and  all  the  privileges 
of  adopted  children  are  secured  and  to  be  extended,  by 
God  on  his  part,  to  the  child,  upon  the  fulfilment,  on 
his  part,  of  the  promises  made  by  the  sponsors.   . 

And  now,  in  conclusion,  we  repudiate  the  charge,  that 
it  is  a  want  of  faith,  and  a  want  of  reverence  for  the 
Sacraments,  and  a  rationalizing  spirit,  which  rejects  that 
interpretation  of  the  Baptismal  Service  which  makes  the 
child  to  receive  the  inner  and   spiritual  grace,  by   and 

cannot  perforn))  nor  upon  the  faith  and  repentance  of  their  natural 
parents  or  pro-parents,  or  of  their  god-fathers  or  god-mothers,  but 
upon  the  ordinance  and  institution  of  Christ.  But  it  is  requisite 
that  when  they  come  to  age  they  should  perform  these  conditions  of 
faith  and  repentence,  for  wh  ich  also  their  god-fathers  and  god-mothers 
charitably  undertook  on  their  behalf  And  what  they  do  for  the  in- 
fant in  this  case,  the  infant  himself  is  truly  said  to  do,  as  in  the 
courts  of  this  kingdom  daily,  the  infant  does  answer  by  his  guar- 
dian; and  it  is  usual  to  do  homage  by  proxy,  and  for  princes  to  mar- 
ry by  proxy.  For  the  further  justification  of  this  answer,  see  St 
Aug.  Epis.  2.3,  ad  Boniface." 

The  answer  of  the  Bishops  to  the  exceptions  of  the  ministers. 

CardwelVs  Conferences,  p.  357. 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  275 

through  the  waters  of  Baptism.  Faith  is  true  only  when 
it  rests  on  truth  revealed  ;  and  that  infants  are  thus  trans- 
formed in  Baptism  is  not  revealed.  Reverence  becomes 
superstition,  if  it  be  exercised  upon  error.  We  reject 
this  interpretation,  not  because  we  doubt  that  God  could, 
by  this  Sacrament,  so  change  the  nature  of  the  child, 
but  because  we  have  no  proof  or  promise  that  he  does 
and  will.  We  reject  it,  because  it  is  opposed  to  the 
uniform  teaching  of  the  Bible,  that  the  spiritual  prere- 
quisites, repentance  and  faith,  must  ever  precede  Bap- 
tism as  its  condi'iou,  and  never  follow  it  as  its  result. 
VVe  reject  it,  because  our  Church,  by  her  Articles  and 
Catechism,  and  tlie  provision  for  sponsors,  testifies  that 
such  repentance  and  faith  must  precede  in  the  cases  of 
adults  and  infants  alike — in  the  one  case  personally,  and 
in  the  other  sponsorially — the  reception  of  the  Sacra- 
ment. We  reject  it,  because  it  runs  counter  to  the 
universal  Scripture  truth  that  it  is  through  the  Word, 
through  faith  in  a  proclaimed  and  offered  Saviour,  and 
through  this  means  alone,  that  the  heart  is  won,  through 
conviction  and  godly  sorrow  and  true  belief,  to  the  Lamb 
of  God  that  taketli  away  its  sins.  We  reject  it,  because 
it  accustoms  the  mind  to  regard  it  as  a  settled  principle, 
that  Sacraments  operate  with  spiritual  influence  upon 
the  unconscious,  unthinking,  and  unfeeling  soul  of  in- 
fancy; and  because  from  this  principle,  the  step  is  brief 
and  easy  to  the  btlief  that  they  may  also  operate,  of 
their  inherent  force,  upon  the  stupid,  unexercised,  im- 
penitent, careless  heart,  which  is  brought  under  their 
influence; — a  belief  ruinous  to  habits  of  watchfulness, 
pray  erf  ulness,  and  self-examination.     We  reject  it,  be- 


276  ,  INFANT    BAPTISM. 

cause  we  believe  with  Hooker,  that  "  the  manner  of  the 
necessity  of  Sacraments  to  life  supernatural,  is  not,  in 
all  respects,  as  food  unto  natural  life,  because  they  con- 
tain, in  themselves,  no  vital  force  or  efficacy;  they  are 
not  physical,  but  moral  instruments,  of  salvation,  duties 
of  worship  and  service,  which,  unless  we  perform  as  the 
author  of  grace  requireth,  they  are  unprofitable."^^ 

And  such  a  view  of  the  Sacrament,  how  does  it,  at 
the  same  time,  awaken  our  gratitude,  encourage  our 
hopes,  and  secure  our  diligent  culture  of  the  child,  whom 
we  have  brought  to  Christ  in  Baptism  !  That  God  has 
received  him  into  his  Church;  that  he  has  graciously 
added  to  his  promise  to  give  him  his  Holy  Spirit,  a  visible 
sign  and  seal;  that  he  has  by  attested  covenant  given 
over  to  the  child  the  heavenly  inheritance  upon  the 
possession  of  which  he  may  enter  as  soon  as  he  shall 
exercise  the  conditions,  penitence  and  faith;  that  all 
these  gifts  come  to  the  child  of  believing  parents,  is  to 
those  parents'  hearts  a  thought  for  comfort  and  for  hope. 
And  yet,  that  the  child  may  forfeit  the  inheritance  made 
over  to  him  by  compact,  but  not  yet,  because  of  his 
tender  years,  in  possession;  that  he  may  fail  to  fulfil  the 
conditions — how  does  this  consideration  lead  the  anxious 
parent  to  watch  over  the  development  of  the  child's 
awakening  and  opening  mind;  earnestly  to  pray ,  and 
carefully  to  bring  him  up  in  the  constant  nurture  and  ad- 
monition of  the  Lord  !  If  he  were  sure  that  his  child 
were  already  spirtually  regenerate,  he  might  be  tempted 
to  withhold  instruction,  prayer,  and  culture.  But  when 
he   sees  that  upon  his  faithfulness  and  effort,  in  good 

"  '2  Book  V,  §57. 


INFANT    BAPTISM.  277 

measure,  it  will  depend  whether  his  child  shall  enjoy 
the  rich  blessing  of  forgiveness  and  sonship  which  he 
enjoy,  then  every  motive  urges  him  to  diligence  and 
to  prayer.  Yes,  ovec  the  sheltered  soul  of  th*  little 
immortal  hovers  the  promised  Spirit,  ready  to  beam  its 
sunlight  upon  the  first  unfolding  of  the  roseate  leaves  of 
its  young  existence;  and  human  faith  and  hope  and  love 
tend  the  tender  nursling,  and  remove  every  obstruction, 
and  provide  every  facility,  that  the  lifegiving  influences 
of  the  descending  Spirit  may  bring  out  that  bud  of  im- 
mortality into  full  bloom  and  perfect  fragrant  life.  That 
such  a  blessing  may  attend  all  our  cares  and  prayers 
and  pains,  God,  in  his  great  mercy,  grant  ! 


XII. 

2ri)e  13apti0nial  Seirlccs,  awt  tlji^  (Halab^sm. 


"The  ministration  of  private  Baptism  of  children  in 
houses,"  is  an  office  provided  for  cases  of  great  neces- 
sity, when,  from  sickness,  or  other  causes,  children 
cannot  be  brought  into  the  church.  It  provides  that  the 
Lord's  Prayer,  and  some  of  the  Collects  in  the  Office 
of  Public  Baptism  be  used;  that  the  child  shall  be  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost; 
and  that  the  thanksgiving,  as  in  the  public  office,  shall 
succeed.  The  rubric  which  follows,  declares  the  child 
to  be  "sufficiently  and  lawfully  baptized."  Should  the 
child  recover,  provision  is  made  that  he  be  brought  into 
the  church,  and  his  true  Baptism  certifi.ed,  when  the 
same  service  in  substance  is  used,  as  in  the  form  for 
Public  Baptism.  As  the  service  was  adopted  at  the 
same  time  with  that  for  the  Public  Baptism  of  children, 
it  underwent,  substantially,  the  same  mutations. 

There  are,  however,  some  points  of  interest  peculiar 
to  this  service  which  demand  our  notice. 

In  our  last  chapter,  we  spoke  of  sponsors  as  being 
necessary,  in  the  view  of  the  Church,  in  infant  Baptism. 
Here,  however,  sponsors  are  dispensed  with,  and  still  the 


AND   THE    CATECHISM.  279 

Baptism  is  declared  lawful  and  valid.  Does  not  this  fact 
overthrow  our  statement  ?  We  think  not.  Observe 
that,  by  the  Church's  theory,  such  Baptism  is  allowed 
to  be  administered  only  under  ^^  a  great  cause  and  ne- 
cessity,^'* when  so  many  Collects  from  the  form  of 
public  Baptism  are  to  be  used  <'  as  the  time  and  present 
exigence  will  suffer.'''*  Now,  as  the  omission  of  a  Sa- 
crament altogether,  where  from  sickness  or  inability  it 
cannot  be  received,  is  declared  by  the  Church  to  be  no 
loss  to  him  who  sincerley  and  in  faith  desires  it;  as  the 
full  benefit  and  blessing  of  the  Sacrament,  under  such 
circumstances,  accrue  to  him  ;  so  wherever,  from  the 
like  necessity,  any  part  of  the  Sacrament  is  dispensed 
with,  we  cannot  suppose  that  its  validity  is  destroyed, 
or  its  blessing  diminished.  This  were  a  sutiicient  expla- 
nation of  a  case  which  is  clearly  an  exception  to  a  gen- 
eral rule.  But  it  may  be  added,  also,  that  what  is  es- 
sential in  sponsorship,  namely,  the  faith  and  repen- 
tance of  the  pareats  or  god-parents,  is  supposed  in  the 
very  act  of  their  presenting  the  child,  in  such  exigency, 
for  Baptism.  In  the  one  case,  such  faith  is  expressed 
by  words  of  solemn  promise;  in  the  other  case,  because 
of  the  exigency  of  the  time,  the  promises  are  implied  in 
the  act,  and  provision  is  made,  that  if  the  child  recover, 
it  shall  be  brought  to  the  church,  and  the  solemn 
promises  be  spoken  which  were  before  silently  implied. 

Lay  Baptism. 

This  service  for  private  Baptism  is  one  of  peculiar 
interest,  as  the  question  of  the  validity  of  Lay  Baptism  is 


280  THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES, 

intimately  connected  with  it.  A  brief  history  of  the 
service  will  show  what,  as  a  fact,  is  the  doctrine  of  our 
Church,  and  the  Church  of  England,  on  the  subject. 

It  is  well  known  that  the  Romish  Church  regards 
Baptism  as  so  essential  to  salvation  as  to  allow  its  ad- 
ministration by  laymen  and  women  in  cases  of  near 
approach  of  death.  Such  was  the  practice  at  the  time 
of  the  Reformation.  The  first  Liturgy  of  Edward  au- 
thorized Lay  Baptism,  and  no  change  in  this  respect 
was  made  when  it  was  revised  in  1552;  nor  when  it  was 
again  revised  and  confirmed  under  Elizabeth,  in  1560. 
It  is  to  be  observed,  however,  that  women  were  not 
authorized,  as  they  are  in  the  Romish  Church,  to  ad- 
minister this  Sacrament  in  cases  of  necessity.  The 
language  of  the  rubric  is,  "  let  them  that  be  present  call 
upon  God  for  his  grace,  and  say  the  Lord's  Prayer,  if 
the  time  will  suffer.  And  then  one  of  fhem  shall  name 
the  child,  and  dip  him  in  the  water,  and  pour  water  upon 
him,  saying  these  words. ^'  '  Notwithstanding  that  wo- 
men were  not  authorized,  it  is  probable  that  from  long 
custom  they  sometimes  administered  the  Sacrament; 
but  that  they  did  so,  not  only  without  authority,  but 
also  against  the  sentiments  of  the  rulers  of  the  Church. 
In  a  letter  of  Sampson  and  Humphrey — two  clergy- 
men of  the  Church,  who  were  dissatisfied  because  the 
ecclesiastical  habits  and  some  rites  oftensive  to  them 
were  enjoined  by  Queen  Elizabeth — a  letter  written  in 
1566,  to  BuUinger,  pastor  of  the  church  at  Zurich,  it  is 
mentioned  as  one  of  the  "  remaining  straws  and  chips 

'  Rubric  in  the  last  Liturgy  of  Edward. 


AND    THE    CATECHISM.  281 

of  the  popish  religion,"  that  license  is  given  to  women 
to  baptize  in  private  houses.  ^  But  in  a  letter  of  Bishops 
Grindal  and  Horn,  to  the  same  BuUinger,  in  the  follow- 
ing year,  they  declare,  "  We  entirely  agree  that  wo- 
men neither  can  nor  ought  to  baptize  infants  upon  any 
account  whatever."  Sampson  and  Humphrey  probably 
spoke  of  what  was  sometimes  practised  without  being, 
as  they  supposed,  licensed  by  any  sufficient  authority. ' 
Such  is  the  testimony  of  Archbishop  Sandys — who  was 
one  of  the  revisers  of  the  Liturgy  in  the  second  of 
Elizabeth — given  in  his  will:  ''  For  private  baptism  to 
be  ministered  by  women,  I  take  neither  to  be  prescribed 
nor  admitted."^  The  reason  of  this  he  elsewhere 
stated  to  be,  that  "  women  are  forbidden  to  perform 
any  function  in  the  Church."'  That  laymen  however, 
were  expressly  authorized  to  baptize  in  cases  of  emer- 
gency, is  evident,  not  only  from  the  rubric  already 
quoted,  but  also  from  "  the  resolutions  and  orders  taken 
by  common  consent  of  the  Bishops,  until  a  synod  should 

*  Zurich  Letters,  p.  164. 

"  •'  Here  (at  the  Hampton  c.ouri  conference)  the  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester spake  very  learne()ly  and  earnest  on  that  point,  (viz..  Bap- 
tism in  private  by  laymen,)  affirming  that  the  denying  of  private 
persons  in  cases  of  necessity  to  baptize,  were  to  cross  all  antiquity, 
seeing  tiiat  it  had  been  the  ancient  and  common  practice  of  the 
Church,  when  ministers,  at  such  times,  could  not  be  got;  and  that  it 
was  a  good  rule  agreed  upon  among  divines  that  the  minisler  is  not 
of  the  essence  of  the  Sacrament."  Barlow's  sum  and  substance  of 
the  conference,  &c.,  in  Cardwell's  Conferences,  &c.,  167. 

<Strype's  Whitgift,  vol.  i,  p.  548.    duoted  by  Short,  p.  134. 
*Why,  then,  doth  the  book  allow  that  women  should  baptize' 
The  best  answer  is,  that  though  the  book  seem  so  to  do,  yet  doth 


282  THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES, 

be  had,"  in  which  it  is  enjoined  "that  private  Baptism 
in  necessity,  as  in  peril  of  death,  to  be  ministered 
either  by  the  Curate,  Deacon,  or  reader,  or  some  other 
grave  and  sober  person,  if  the  time  will  suffice."  ''  This 
was  in  the  year  1560. 

Although  not  long  after  this  period,  the  heads  of  the 
Church,  but  for  the  objection  and  interposition  of  the 
Queen,  would  have  enjoined  that  private  Baptism,  even 
in  cases  of  necessity,  "  should  only  be  ministered  by  a 
lawful  Minister  or  Deacon,  called  to  be  present  for  that 

it  not  commend  or  allow  of  that  fact.  Tnie,  it  is,  that  their  chari- 
table dealing  can  do  the  child  no  harm,  and  their  present  prayer 
to  God  may  do  it  good.  And  the  sick,  woful  mother  receiveth 
comfort  if  it  die.  But  if  it  live,  it  is  commanded  by  th<.  book  that 
the  child  be  brought  to  the  Church,  and  the  wltnes^ses  be  examined 
of  all  circums'ances,  and  if  the  rninistei  find  a  manifest  defect,  he  is 
commanded  to  proceed  to  prayer  and  the  ministration  of  Baptism, 
and  (at  the  least)  bar  tize  the  child  with  a  condition — "If  then  it  be 
not  already  baptized,  I  baptize  thee  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son, 
and  of  the  Hoi,  Ghost."  It  is  referred  to  the  judgment  of  the 
minister  whether  he  think  the  Baptism  sufficient  and  lawful 

And  the  fourth  general  council  of  Carthage,  (Canon  100,)  where- 
unto  St.  Augustine  did  subscribe,  liath  thesn  words,  "  Mulier  bap- 
lizare  non  pre-umat."  And  I  heard  (I'vers  reverend  fathers  (who 
were  learned  p.eachers  in  King  Edward's  days,  and  very  privy  to 
the  doings  in  the  convention,  and  themselves  dealers  '■'in  anno  primo 
ElizabethcB''')  affirm  plainly  that  there  was  no  meaning  to  allow  that 
midvvives  or  women  should  baptize,  no  more  than  to  minister  the 
Supper  of  the  Lord  to  the  sick  m  private  houses.  But  would  not 
lay  it  down  in  plain  words,  lest  it  might  hinder  the  passage  in  the 
parliament,  tantae  molis  erat  Romanum  tollere  ritum. — The  opinion 
vf  Mattheio  Hutton,  Cardwelis  Conferences,  p.  154. 

"Strype's  Annals,  vol.  i,  p.  221. 


AND    THE    CATECHISM.  283 

purpose,'"  it  is  certain  <hat  no  changes  in  the  regulations 
of  the  Church  upon  this  subject  were  effected  until  the 
the  reign  of  James  I.  At  the  Hampton  Court  Confer- 
ence, the  Presbyterian  divines  objected  to  the  practice 
of  Lay  Baptism.  To  meet  their  views,  the  rubric  was 
so  changed  as  to  direct  "the  Minister  of  the  parish,  or, 
in  his  absence,  any  other  lawful  Minister  that  can  be 
pro  ured,''  to  administer  the  Sacrament.  In  the  year 
1712,  at  a  meeting  of  the  Archbishops  and  Bishops  of 
the  Church,  called  on  aicnunt  ol"  an  excited  discussion 
upon  this  point,  they  un;uiiniou>ly  resolved  "  that  Lay 
Baptism  should  be  discouraged  as  tnuch  as  possible; 
but  if  the  essentials  had  been  preserved  in  a  Baptism 
by  a  lay  hand,  it  was  not  to  be  repeated.""  This  is  all 
the  legislation  of  the  English  Church  upon  the  subject. 
Her  practice,  and  that  of  our  own  Church,  has  been  to 
regard  Baptism  by  laymen  as  valid,  and  not  to  be  re- 
peated. 

From  this  brief  account,  we  see  what  is  the  settled 
doctrine  of  our  Church  on  this  subject.  It  is,  in  the 
language  of  Bishop  Hopkins,  "  that  Baptism,  adminis- 
tered by  lay  hands,  though  irregular,  and  unauthorized 
by  any  exi>ress  rubric  since  the  year  1603,  is,  neverthe- 
less, valid,  and  not  to  be  repeated.'"^  That  such  con- 
tinues to  be  the  doctrine  of  the  Mother  Church,  is  evi- 
dent from  repeated  decisions  of  the  ecclesiastical  courts 
of  that  country.      One  is  mentioned  by  Bishop  White  in 

'Strype's  Grindal,  Appendix,  p.  61. 
'  Bishop  White's  Memoirs,  second  edition,  p.  213. 
^  Novelties  which  disturb  our  Peace,  p.  10.      The  proposition  ia 
maintained  by  an  eirmy  of  logic  and  authority  not  to  be  overthrown, 


284  THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES, 

his  Memoirs.  ^°  It  was  occasioned  by  a  suit  brought  by 
a  Dissenter  against  a  parish  Minister,  for  refusing  to 
bury  a  child  who  had  been  baptized  by  a  Minister  dis- 
senting from  the  Establishment.  The  judge,  Sir  John 
Nichols,  decided  it  against  the  clergyman.  A  much 
more  recent  case  was  decided  in  the  same  way.  In  the 
case  of  Martin  vs.  Escott,  a  clergyman  of  the  English 
Church  "  was  sentenced  to  suspension  from  the  Min- 
istry for  three  months,  for  having  refused  to  bury  the 
body  of  a  child  who  had  been  baptized  by  a  Methodist 
preacher,  under  the  plea  that  such  Baptism  was  a  mere 
nullity,  being  performed  not  by  a  lawful  Minister,  but 
by  a  mere  layman.  The  ecclesiastical  court  went  large- 
ly into  the  authorities,  and  condemned  the  clergyman  on 
the  ground  that  Lay  Baptism,  administered  with  water 
in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  was  valid  and  sufficient, 
by  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England. ""  That  our 
own  Church  occupies  the  same  ground  with  the  Church 
of  England  on  this  subject,  is  evident  from  the  fact,  that 
no  change  has  been  made  in  her  Baptismal  Services. 
It  is  further  evident  from  history.  In  the  General 
Convention  of  1811,  two  clergymen  attempted  to  pro- 
cure from  that  body  a  declaration  of  the  invalidity  of 
Lay  Baptism.  Happily,  they  found  no  encouragement; 
happily  we  say,  for  in  the  language  of  Bishop  White, 
if  this  sentiment  had  prevailed,  "  there  would  be  no 
certainty  of  the  existence  of  a  Bishop  in  Christen- 
dom." ^^ 

'"Memoirs,  p.  211,  second  edition. 
"  Hopkin's  Novelties,  p.  JO. 

"^  The  following  is  the  account  given  of  this  attempt :  "  It  appears 
further  on  the  Journal,  that  two  reverend  gentlemen,  Benjamin 


AND   THB    CATECHISM.  285 

The  doctrine  of  our  Church,  then,  upon  this  subject, 
is  clear.  She  does  not  allow  her  own  members  to  re- 
ceive Baptism  from  any  but  lawful  ministers  ;  and,  by 
that  term,  it  is  evident  she  means  her  own  ministers. 
When,  however,  from  any  circumstances,  any  of  her 
members  are  baptized  by  others  than  her  own  ministers, 
or  when  she  receives  into  her  fold  persons  baptized  in 
other  denominations,  she  regards  the  Baptism  as  irregu- 
lar and  unauthorized,  but,  nevertheless,  valid  and  not 
to  be  repeated.     This,  her  judgment,  is  grounded,  not 


Benham  and  Virgil  H.  Barber,  made  to  the  Conyention  an  appli- 
cation, the  purport  of  which  is  not  recorded,  but  became  an  object 
ofaiiention  in  conversation,  during  and  after  the  session,  besides  its 
occasioning  a  debate  at  the  time,  in  the  house  of  clerical  and  lay 
deputies.  The  subject  is  contemplated  as  likely  to  be  the  cause  of 
future  litigation,  and,  therefore,  now  noticed  with  sorrow.  The 
object  of  the  two  gentlemen  alluded  to,  was  to  procure  a  declaration 
of  the  invalidity  of  Lay  Baptism  ;  and  they  were  said  to  be  con- 
scientiously scrupulous  of  admitting  as  members  of  their  congrega- 
tions, persons  who  had  received  no  other.  This,  of  course,  pre- 
cluded accessions,  except  on  condition  of  compliance  with  their  pro- 
posal, from  the  most  numerous  denomination  in  the  State;  their 
Baptism  by  Congregational  ministers  being  considered  as  performed 
by  laymen.  Although  the  clergymen  alluded  to  were  singular  in  car- 
rying the  mutter  so  far,  yet  there  has  been  an  increasing  tendency 
in  some  of  the  clergy,  to  administer  Episcopal  Baptism  to  such  as 
desire  it,  on  alleged  doubts  of  the  invalidity  of  former  Baptism." 
The  Bishop  adds,  in  a  note  to  the  above,  that  "  one  of  the  two  cler- 
gymen (Mr.  Barber)  distinguishing  himself  as  above,  in  a  few  years 
after  became  a  Roman  Catholic.  In  the  communion  thus  joined 
by  him,  it  is  not  uncommon  for  midwives  to  baptize.  It  is  a  well- 
known  property  of  extremes,  that  they  are  often  seen  to  make  the 

connecting  points  of  a  circle." 

Memoirs,  p.  211. 


286  THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES, 

upon  the  supposition  that  they  are  lawful  ministers  by 
whom  the  Baptism  has  been  administered — for  what- 
ever may  be  her  decision  on  this  point,  it  is  not  here 
involved — but  upon  the  principle  that  even  if  they  are 
laymen,  the  Baptism  still  is  valid.  Her  judgment  is,  as 
expressed  in  the  last  rubric  but  one  in  this  service,  that 
the  essential  parts  of  Baptism  are,  that  the  child  be  bap- 
tized with  water  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  She  has  determined  that 
the  mode  and  matter  of  administering  the  Sacrament 
constitute  its  essence,  while  the  want  of  an  apostolic 
ministry  belongs  to  its  order,  and  does  not  destroy  its 
validity. 

It  would  be  impossible,  upon  the  Umited  plan  which 
we  have  prescribed  for  this  work,  to  enter  upon  the 
consideration  of  the  consistency  of  these  views  of  the 
Church  with  the  truth  of  Scripture.  Whoever  would 
see  the  subject  treated  in  a  brief  yet  thorough  manner, 
may  consult  the  first  of  the  masterly  letters  of  Bishop 
Hopkins  on  the  "  Novelties  which  disturb  our  Peace." 
We  can  barely  give  a  specimen  of  the  course  of  argu- 
ment pursued,  but  cannot  enter  upon  it.  It  is  found 
that  the  functions  which  were  subsequently  committed 
to  the  Aaronir  Priesthood,  were  before  exercised  with- 
out restriction,  as  is  manifest  in  the  instance  of  Abel 
and  Noah  and  Abraham,  who  offered  sacrifices  ;  and  in 
the  instance  of  Zipporah,  who,  in  a  case  of  extremity, 
performed  circumcision.  These  sacramental  and  priestly 
acts  were  not,  therefore,  inseparably  tied  to  the  Priest- 
hood. Nay,  after  the  Priesthood  was  established,  even 
where  it  was  schismatically  and  sacrilegiously  usurped 


AiND    THE    CATECHISM.  287 

and  exercised  by  Dathan,  Korah  and  Abiram;  and  when, 
for  this  rebellion  and  impiety   the  earth  opened   and 
swallowed  them  up,  their  offering  was  not  treated  as  a 
nullity,  "  For   the    Lord  spake    unto    Moses,    saying, 
Speak  unto  Eleazer,  the  son  of  Aaron,  the  Priest,  that 
he  take  up  the  censers  out  of  the  burning  and  scatter 
thou  the  fire  yonder,  for  they  are  hallowed.     The  cen- 
sers of  theae  sinners  against  their  own  souls,  let  them 
mark  broad  plates  for  a  covering  of  the  Altar,  for  they 
offered  them  before  the  Lord;  therefore  they  are  hallowed.'''' 
Is  it  not  clear,  that  tjie  offering  is  accepted  and  regarded 
as  consecrated,  even  when  the  Minister  usurps  his  of- 
fice ?     Again:  in  the  New  Testament  our  Lord  bid  the 
people  "observe  and  do  what  was  commanded  by  the 
Pharisees,  because  they  sit  in  Moses'  seat.''     They  had 
no  right  to  occupy  that  seat,  but  occupying  it  they  were 
to  be  obeyed.    Their  acts  were  unauthorized,  but  being 
performed,  valid.   When  the  disciples  saw  one  separate 
from  Christ,  casting  out  devils  in  his  name,  they  were 
ofiended;  but  Jesus  said,  "Forbid  him    not."     Here 
the  same  principle  is  involved.     It  is  involved,  also,  in 
the  language  of  St.  Paul,  when  he  "  rejoiced  that  the 
gospel  was  preached,  whether  in  pretence  or  in  truth." 
These  specimens  of   Scripture    authority — which    will 
repay  a  full  examination — will  convince  the  reader  that 
the  view  of  our  Church  on  the  subject  of  the  validity  of 
Lay  Baptism,  accords  with  the  principles  and  the  prac- 
tices recorded  in  God's  Word. 

We  know  that  there  are  those  who  regard  this  doc- 
trine as  admitted  by  the  Church,  but  yet  w^th  plain 
inconsistency  with  her  views  elsewhere  expressed  of 


288  THE    BAPTISMAL   SERVICES, 

the  Ministry  and  Sacraments.  And,  indeed,  if  the 
doctrine  of  the  Church  be  tliat  an  Apostolic  Ministry  is 
essential  to  the  being  of  a  Church,  and  to  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  Sacraments,  then  her  practice  and  her 
doctrine  on  the  subject  of  Lay  Baptism  are  inconsistent 
with  it,  and  her  offices  stand  in  direct  and  gross  con- 
tradiction to  each  other.  We  are  reluctant  to  charge 
such  gross  contradiction  on  offices  so  wisely  and  delib- 
erately constructed ;  offices  which  passed  under  the 
searching  cognizance  of  minds  enriched  and  adorned 
with  the  highest  gifts  of  reason  and  of  learning.  Rather 
than  believe  that  the  Church  has  so  stultified  herself,  a 
reverent  regard  for  her  authority,  we  should  suppose, 
would  lead  her  children — who  cannot  but  admit  that 
she  sanctions  Lay  Baptism — to  question  the  soundness 
of  their  interpretation  of  her  views  upon  the  necessity 
of  a  threefold  Ministry,  not  only  for  the  regular  order 
and  the  well-being,  but  for  the  being  of  a  Church.  The 
unequivocal  language  of  the  last  rubric  of  this  service, 
confirmed  by  the  uniform  practice  of  the  Church  of 
England  and  our  own,  is,  that  the  essential  parts  of  the 
Sacrament  of  Baptism  are  water  and  Baptism  in  the 
name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  Hence, 
the  principle  that  the  Ministry  is  of  the  order  and  not  of 
the  essence  of  a  Sacrament ;  and  hence,  also,  the  cor- 
relative principle,  that  it  is  necessary  to  the  perfect 
organization  and  the  well-being,  but  not  to  the  existence 
of  the  Church.  These  principles  admitted,  the  Church 
is  consistent  with  herself.  These  admitted,  we  can 
blend  that  Gospel  zeal  for  God's  positive  ordinances 
and  institutions,  which  properly  denounces  all  schism 


AND  THE   CATECHISM.  289 

and  separation  from  his  holy  Apostolic  Church,  with 
that  Gospel  charity  for  all  who,  having  so  separated,  are 
yet  serving  God  and  promoting  the  interests  of  the  Re- 
deemer's kingdom,  which  led  St.  Paul  to  say  of  those 
who  preached  Christ  even  from  contention,  that  therein 
he  did  rejoice,  yea  and  would — whatever  the  feelings 
of  others,  or  the  promptings  of  his  own  narrow  zeal 
might  be — he  would  rejoice.  But  if  these  principles  be 
denied,  the  Church  is  made  to  stand  out  to  the  world 
an  elaborate  self-contradiction  ;  she  is  made  to  condemn 
her  own  practice,  to  nullify  her  own  enactments,  to 
depose  her  own  Ministry,  and  unchurch  her  own  mem- 
bers. Consummate  is  the  wisdom  of  Hooker  on  this 
subject — a  wisdom  through  which  speaks  the  voice  of 
all  ages,  and  the  oracles  of  all  law.  "  Are  not  many 
things  firm,  being  done,  although  in  part  done  otherwise 
than  positive  rigor  and  strictness  did  require?  Nature, 
as  much  as  possible,  inclineth  to  validities  and  preser- 
vation. Dissolutions  and  nullities  of  things  done  are 
not  favored,  but  hated  when  either  done  without  cause, 
or  extended  beyond  their  reach.  If,  therefore,  at  any 
time  it  come  to  pass,  that  in  teaching  publicly  or  pri- 
vately, in  delivering  this  blessed  Sacrament  of  regen- 
eration, some  unsanctified  hand,  contrary  to  God*s  sup- 
posed ordinance,  do  intrude  itself  to  execute  that, 
whereupon  the  laws  of  God  and  his  Church  have  de- 
puted others,  which  of  these  two  opinions  seemeth  more 
agreeable  with  equity — ours  that  disallow  what  is  done 
amiss,  yet  make  not  the  force  of  the  Word  and  Sacra- 
ments, much  less  their  nature  and  very  substance,  to 
depend  on  the  Minister's  authority  and  calling;  or  else 
13 


290  THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES, 

theirs  which  defeat,  disannul,  and  annihilate,  in  respect 
of  that  one  only  personal  defect,  there  being  not  any 
law  of  God  which  saith  that  if  the  Minister  be  incom- 
petent, his  word  shall  be  no  word,  his  baptism  no  bap- 
tism? Sith  no  defect  in  their  vocation  that  teach  the 
truth  is  able  to  take  away  the  benefit  from  him  who 
heareth,  wherefore  should  the  want  of  a  lawful  calling 
in  them  that  baptize,  make  Baptism  to  be  vain?" 

Baptism  of  those  of  riper  years. 

The  ministration  of  Baptism  to  such  as  are  of  riper 
years,  was  introduced  into  the  English  service  at  its 
last  review.  On  account  of  the  growth  of  many  sects 
during  the  Protectorate  of  Cromwell,  Infant  Baptism  had 
been  much  neglected.  Hence,  the  necessity  of  a  ser- 
vice for  adults  was  felt  immediately  after  the  Restora- 
tion. ,  The  service  is  like  that  for  infants,  with  such 
changes  only  as  were  needful  to  adapt  it  to  persons  of 
riper  years.  The  first  rubric  in  the  English  Liturgy 
requires  that  a  week's  notice  of  such  proposed  Baptism 
be  given,  that  the  candidate  may  be  examined  of  his 
fitness  for  the  Sacrament.  By  our  rubric,  timely  notice 
is  directed  to  be  given.  Godfathers  and  mothers  are 
provided  as  witnesses  of  the  vows  of  the  baptized, 
whose  duty  it  is  to  admonish  them  when  those  vows 
are  violated  or  neglected.  Provision  is  made  in  the 
American,  but  not  in  the  English  service,  that  Adult 
Baptism  may  be  performed  in  private,  in  cases  of  ex- 
treme sickness.  The  Gospel  used  in  this  service  is  a 
part  of  the  third  chapter  of  St.  John.     An  exhortation 


AND    THE    CATECHISM.  291 

suitable  to  the  circumstances  of  the  candidates  follows. 
Direction  is  also  given  by  rubric,  as  to  the  method  in 
which  the  two  services  for  Infant  and  Adult  Baptism  are 
to  be  combined,  when  both  infants  and  adults  are  to  be 
baptized  at  the  same  time. 

Catechism. 

"  The  Catechism,  or  the  instruction  to  be  learned  by 
every  person  before  he  be  brought  to  be  confirmed  by 
the  Bishop,"  is  the  next  portion  of  the  Prayer-Book,  to 
which  we  would  call  attention.  It  originally  formed 
part  of  the  office  for  Confirmation,  and  followed  what 
is  now  called  the  preface  to  that  service.  In  the  first 
service,  there  was  a  preface  and  four  rubrics.  The 
present  preface  consists  of  that  of  Edward  and  the  first 
rubric  combined,  and  slightly  altered  in  form,  but  not 
in  sense.  The  three  remaining  rubrics  were  afterwards 
omitted.  Of  these  thiee  rubrics,  the  first  declares  that 
Confirmation  is  ministered  to  them  that  be  baptized, 
that  by  imposition  of  hands  and  prayer  they  may  re- 
ceive strength  and  defence  against  all  temptations  to  sm 
and  the  assaults  of  the  world  and  the  devil.  This  was 
omitted,  probably,  because  it  seems  too  much  to  elevate 
the  benefits  of  the  rite,  in  comparison  to  what  belongs 
to  the  Sacraments  instituted  by  Christ,  and  to  connect 
the  reception  of  grace  so  directly  with  the  laying  on  of 
hands,  as  to  lead  to  misapprehension,  if  not  to  error. 
The  second  rubric  declares  that  it  is  agreeable  with  the 
usage  in  time  past,  that  the  baptized  should  be  con- 
firmed.    Why  this  was  omitted  we  cannot  conjecture. 


292  THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES, 

The  third  rubric  declares,  "  so  that  no  man  may  think 
any  detriment  shall  come  to  children  by  deferring  their 
confirmation,  that  if  they  die  in  infancy,  being  baptized, 
they  are  undoubtedly  saved."  As  I  find  this  to  have 
been  one  of  the  points  objected  to  at  the  Savoy  Confer- 
ence by  the  Presbyterian  divines,  it  may  have  been 
omitted  at  the  Convocation  which  soon  followed,  in. 
deference  to  their  objections.  The  Catechism  which 
followed  this  preface  and  the  rubrics  in  Edward's  book, 
are  the  same  as  those  which  we  have  at  present,  with 
the  exception  of  the  part  which  follows  the  answer  to 
the  question  upon  the  Lord's  Prayer,  which  pontains  an 
explanation  of  the  Sacraments.  In  the  first  Liturgy  of 
Edward,  the  Commandments  are  not  given  in  full  ;  all 
of  the  fourth  commandment,  for  instance,  which  is  - 
given,  are  these  words:  "  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name 
of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  vain."  The  explanation  of  the 
Sacraments  was  drawn  up  by  Dr.  John  Overall,  after 
the  Hampton  Court  Conference,  and  inserted  by  com- 
mand of  the  king,  and  confirmed  by  the  Convocation 
and  parliament  at  the  last  review,  in  1661.'^  It  has 
been  adopted  by  our  own  Church,  with  a  few  altera- 
tions. The  words  godfathers  and  godmothers  have  been 
changed,  in  the  second  answer  and  third  question,  to 
the  word  sponso:  s ;  and  the  word  king  or  qtieen  has  been 
changed  into  civil  authority,  in  answer  to  the  question. 
What  is  thy  duty  towards  thy  neighbor?  In  the  answer 
to  the  question  which  follows  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the 
terms  "dangers    ghostly   and   bodily,"   and  "ghostly 

'^Shepherd  on  Common  Prayer,  vol.  ii,  p.  268. 


AND    THE    CATECHISM,  293 

eiictny,"  are  changed  into  ''dangers  both  of  soul  and 
body,"  and  into  "  spiritual  enemy."  A  very  significant 
change  was  made  by  our  Church,  in  the  answer  to  the 
question,  "  What  is  the  inward  part  or  thing  signified" 
in  the  Sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper?  The  answer  in 
the  English  Prayer-Book  is,  "The  body  and  blood  of 
Christ,  which  are  verily  and  indeed  taken  and  received 
by  the  faithful  in  the  Lord's  Supper."  In  our  Catechism 
the  answer  runs  thus:  "The  body  and  blood  of  Christ 
which  are  spiritually  taken,"  &c.  An  argument  had 
been  derived  from  the  words  verily  and  indeed,  by  those 
in  the  English  Church  who  maintained  semi-popish 
views  of  the  Sacraments,  that  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  were  really,  literally,  locally,  present  in  the  ele- 
ments, and  were,  in  this  sense,  taken  and  received  by 
the  faithful.  There  is  no  ground  for  such  argument  in 
the  words.  Nevertheless,  our  Church,  to  prevent  cavil, 
introduced  the  change,  and  by  introducing  it  showed 
that  she  holds  no  such  sentiment.  If  it  were  literally 
and  corporeally  presented,  it  would  be  in  the  same 
manner,  and  not  spiritually,  received.  A  spiritual  eating 
of  a  literal  body  and  blood,  is  no  greater  absurdity,  than 
a  corporeal  eating  of  a  truth,  a  thought,  an  argument, 
or  a  figure.  We  would  fain  not  introduce  such  remarks 
in  connection  with  this  holy  Sacrament.  We  know  that 
when  men  take  low  and  sensuous  views'  of  the  Sacra- 
ments, and  make  it  necessary  for  others  to  show  their 
absurdity,  they  cry  out  at  the  want  of  a  reverential 
handling  of  their  notions — as  if  a  want  of  reverence  for 
them  were  want  of  reverence  for  the  holy  Sacraments 
of  Christ,  which  they  do  but  darken  and  disfigure.    But 


294 


THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES 


must  we,  therefore,  let  them  pass  uncensured  and  un- 
exposed, from  fear  of  such  clamor?  It  were  to  be  un- 
faithful to  our  trust  as  guardians  and  teachers  of  God's 
Word. 

The  practice  of  catechizing  the  young  and  the  igno- 
rant in  the  truths  of  religion  is  very  ancient,  because  it 
has  ever  been  found  very  necessary.  The  word  cnte- 
chism,  is  derived  from  a  Greek  term,  which  signifies 
instruction  in  the  rudiments  of  knowledge,  by  questions 
and  answers.  It  was  a  custom  among  the  Jews,  as  we 
are  informed  by  Josephus,  to  have  their  children  in- 
structed in  the  law,  by  a  teacher  in  each  village,  called 
''the  instructer  of  babes."'*  Catechetical  schools,  as 
they  were  called,  were  established  at  Alexandria,  Cesa- 
rea,  Antioch,  Rome,  and  Carthage,  for  teaching  the 
truths  of  Christianity  to  the  baptized  children  of  be- 
lievers. Catechists  were  appointed  for.  heathen  cate- 
chumens, of  several  classes,  who,  instructed  and  placed 
upon  probation  for  two  yi?ars,  and  sometimes  more, 
were,  if  approved,  baptized.  One  of  the  earliest  cares 
of  Cranmer,  was  to  provide  a  catechism  for  children. 
Injunctions  were  issued  as  early  as  1536,  that  all  the 
officers  of  the  Church  should  admonish  fathers  and 
mothers  and  governors  of  youth,  to  instruct  them  in  the 
Lord's  Prayer,  the  Creed,  and  Ten  Commandments.'* 
These  were  published  in  the  King's  Primer,  1545.  In 
1548,  Cranmer  himself  published  a  catechism,  which 
was  a  translation  of  a  German  one,  by  Justas  Jonas,  for 

■"■Shepherd,  vol.  li,  p.  257. 
'*  Burnet,  vol.  i,  p.  364. 


AND    THE    CATECHISM.  295 

the  use  ol'  the  Church  in  Nurembergh."'  The  same 
year,  the  Church  Catechism,  in  nearly  its  present  form, 
as  we  have  ah-eady  described  it,  was  drawn  up,  as  it  is 
supposed,  by  Ridley  or  Craiuner. "  Our  Church  requires 
this  Catechism  to  be  learned  of  every  person,  before  he 
be  brought  to  be  confirmed  by  the  Bishop.  At  first,  in 
the  English  Church,  it  was  required  that  once  in  six 
weeks,  at  least,  the  children  should  be  catechized  in  the 
church,  an  half  hour  before  Evening  Prayer.  Bucer 
objected  to  it  as  far  too  infrequent,  and  referred  to  the 
custom  of  Germany,  where  the  children  were  exercised 
in  the  Catechism  three  days  in  the  week.'*  Accord- 
ingly, the  rubric  was  changed,  and  now  directs  the 
curate  of  every  parish,  on  Sundays  and  Holy-Days, 
after  the  second  lesson,  at  Evening  Prayer,  openly  to 
instruct  and  examine  the  children,  who  are  sent  to  him, 
in  some  part  of  the  Catechism.  A  canon  of  the  Church 
of  England  is  more  explicit  than -the  rubric,  and  en- 
joins that  this  instruction  be  upon  every  Sunday  and 
Holy-Day.  It  is  a  regulation  not  strictly  kept  in  the 
English  Church.  In  our  Church,  as  we  have  not  the 
canon,  we  are  not  compelled  to  regard  it  as  an  injunc- 
tion to  repeat  this  exercise  every  Sunday  and  Holy-Day. 
Other  rubrics,  enjoining  the  fathers,  mothers,  masters, 
and  mistresses,  to  send  their  children  and  apprentices 
to  learn  the  Catechism,  and  providing  that  the  children, 
when  they  shall  come  to  a  competent  age,  shall  be 
brought  to  the  Bishop  to  be  confirmed  by  him,  and  that 
the  Minister  of  the  parish  shall  furnish  the  Bishop  with 

'"  Le  Bas's  Life  of  Cranmer,  vol.  i,  p.  251. 

'^ Shepherd,  vol.  ii,  p.  267.  '» Id.,  p.  273. 


296  THE   BAPTISMAL   SERVICES, 

the  names  oH  the  persons  to  be  confirmed,  are  the  same 
in  the  English  and  American  service. 

The  doctrine  taught  by  this  Catechism  has  been 
ah'eady,  in  part,  unfolded.  Its  teachings  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  the  Sacraments,  is  the  only  portion  upon  which 
there  is  any  diversity  of  opinion.  What  we  believe  that 
teaching  to  be  has  been  intimated  in  the  last  and  present 
chapter.  The  answer  to  the  question,  "  What  meanest 
thou  by  the  word  'sacrament?'  "  is,  "I  mean  an  out- 
ward and  visible  sign  of  an  inward  and  spiritual  grace 
given  us."  It  supposes  the  grace  given,  and  of  it  the 
outward  act  is  a  visible  sign.  A  sign  of  any  thing  pre- 
supposes that  to  be  given  or  reckoned,  of  which  it  is  a 
sign.  "  Ordained  by  Christ  himself  :" — this  excludes 
from  the  character  of  Sacraments  all  those  five  ordi- 
nances, besides  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  which 
are  regarded  as  Sacraments  by  the  Romanists.  "As  a 
means  whereby  we  receive  the  same:" — a  means,  be  it 
observed,  not  the  means.  Besides  being  a  sign  of  grace 
given,  whereby  repentance  and  faith  are  exercised,  it  is, 
also,  a  means  whereby  we  receive  the  grace  yet  more 
and  more;  whereby,  in  the  language  of  the  Article, 
"faith  is  confirmed."  "And  a  pledge  to  assure  us 
thereof:" — it  is  a  pillar  set  up,  to  show  us  where  God 
has  been  in  his  power,  and  where  he  will  come  again. 
Then,  it  is  declared,  that  there  are  two  parts  of  a  Sac- 
rament, the  outward  sign  and  the  inward  grace.  In  this 
sense,  therefore,  as  including  both  the  outward  sign 
and  the  inward  grace  reckoned,  the  word  Baptism  is 
used  in  the  first  part  of  the  service,  where  the  baptized 
child  declares  that  he  was  made,  in  Baptism,  "  a  mem- 


AND    THE    CATECHISM.  297 

ber  of  Christ,  a  child  of  God,  and  an  inheritor  of  the 
kingdom  of  heaven."  What  is  the  outward  and  visible 
sign,  and  what  the  inward  and  spiritual  grace,  we  have 
already  sufficiently  explained.  The  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion, "What  is  required  of  persons  to  be  baptized?" 
which  is,  "  repentance  and  faith,"  plainly  proves,  that 
in  the  Church's  view  the  inner  grace  is  to  precede  the 
external  sign.  VV^hy  infants  are  to  be  baptized  when 
they  cannot  personally  exercise  these  virtues,  has  been 
also  shown. 

And  now  the  words  which  follow  are  worthy  of  an 
attentive  and  close  regard.  After  the  outward  part  or 
sign  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  defined,  the  question  is 
asked  "  What  is  the  inward  part  or  thing  signified  ?" 
and  the  answer  is,  "  The  body  and  blood  of  Christ, 
which  are  spiritually  taken  and  received  by  the  faithful 
in  the  Lord's  Supper."  Now,  observe  the  definition  of 
a  Sacrament.  It  has  two  parts;  the  outward  sign  and 
the  inward  grace.  There  is  nothing  outward,  then,  but 
the  sign.  The  thing  signified  is  "inward,"  within  the 
soul,  ^'■spiritual.''''  The  thing  inward  in  baptism,  is  a 
soul  washed  by  tlie  influences  of  the  Spirit.  It  is  an 
invisible  grace,  whose  residence  is  in  the  soul.  The 
thing  signified,  also,  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  must  be  an 
inward  spiritual  thing — something  belonging  to  the  soul. 
The  only  outward  part  is  the  sign,  or  the  bread  and 
wine.  There  being  two  parts,  then,  to  this  Sacrament, 
the  outward  and  the  inward,  and  the  outward  part  being 
wine  and  bread,  the  question  is  asked,  "What  is  the 
inward  part  or  thing  signified.'"  Now,  mark,  that  by  the 
definition  of  a  Sacrament,  it  must  be  something  inward, 
13* 


298  THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES, 

something  belonging  to  the  soul.  What  is  it?  The  body 
and  blood  of  Christ !  But  how  can  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ  be  regarded  as  an  inward  spiritual  grace?  Is 
not  the  definition  of  a  Sacrament  here  violated  by  this 
answer?  No;  it  appears  so,  only  by  neglecting  to  take 
the  entire  answer.  The  inward  and  spiritual  grace  is 
"  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord,  spiritually  taken  and 
received  hy  the  faithful  in  the  Lord's  Supper."  That  is, 
the  inward  grace  is  the  soul's  apprehension  and  hearty 
acceptance  of  the  sacrificed  body  and  shed  blood  of 
Christ  as  its  atonement,  as  its  "righteousness,  sanctifi- 
cation,  and  redemption."  If  this  be  not — as  it  mani- 
festly is — the  true  meaning  of  the  answer,  then  it  is 
made  to  contradict  the  definition  of  a  Sacrament.  Then 
the  thing  signified  is  not  an  inward  and  spiritual  grace. 
Then  both  the  sign  and  the  thing  signified  are  outward 
and  visible.  Then  this  Catechism,  which  passed  under 
the  review  of  enemies  and  friends,  and  after  having 
been  used  for  sixty  years  in  the  Church,  was  ratified  in 
solemn  Convocation,  is  made  within  the  compass  of  a 
dozen  lines  to  contradict  itself.  The  attempt  to  find  the 
doctrine  of  the  presence  of  the  real  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  in  this  answer,  is  as  successful  as  it  would  be  to 
find  the  doctrine  that  a  death  unto  sin  and  a  new  birth 
unto  righteousness  is  not  a  grace  belonging  to  the  soul, 
but  a  living  creature,  present  in  or  with  nr  under  the 
element  of  water.  O,  when  wnll  men  cease  to  grossly 
grope  after  a  Christ  whom  they  can  see  and  handle,  and 
take  Christ  in  their  hearts,  in  the  power  of  his  death  and 
his  resurrection,  as  their  pardon,  their  life,  their  joy, 
their  all?     O  Thou,  who  art  a  spirit,  give  us  a  heart  to 


AND    THE     CATECHISM.  299 

worship  thee  in  spirit  and  in  truth;  and  while  in  rever- 
ent faith  and  love  we  use  the  outward  sign,  give  to  us, 
in  all  its  saving  and  sanctifyiiii!;  power,  the  inward  and 
spiritual  grace  ! 

The  services  which  have  passed  under  our  review  in 
this  and  the  previous  chapter,  are  of  the  deepest  interest 
to  many  of  us  who,  as  parents  or  sponsors,  are  charged 
with  one  of  the  heaviest  responsibilities  which  it  is  pos- 
sible for  man  to  bear.  He  who  looks  upon  his  child  with 
glad  parental  lovp,  must  feel  his  eye  fill  with  tears,  and 
his  heart  beat  with  anxious  care,  when  on  that  child's 
soul  he  sees  God's  hand  has  written  LmmortalitV  ! 
Those  little  ones  are  not  conscious — are  we  ? — that 
upon  our  faithfulness  depends,  in  large  measure,  their 
eternal  destiny.  0  Christian  parents  !  I  could  pray  that 
they  might  die  and  ascend  to  heaven,  without  your  care 
and  culture,  if  I  thought  you  could  be  so  cruelly  faitliless 
to  these  helpless  and  dependent  innocents!  Think  of 
the  fountains  of  jo3^fuI  love,  ever  flowing,  they  have 
opened  in  your  bosom;  of  their  dependence  upon  your 
care  and  nurture,  in  connexion  with  God's  blessing  on 
your  prayers;  of  the  fact  that  they  owe  to  you  existence; 
and  that  while  it  is  capable  of  being  glorious  as  a 
seraph's,  it  is  perilously  liable  to  be  awful  as  a  fiend's; 
think  of  the  glory  of  sharing,  as  it  were,  Christ's  high 
joy  in  being  the  instrument  of  leading  a  soul  on  and  up 
to  heaven's  gate,  whence  it  shall  speed  its  rejoicing  and 
brightening  way  over  the  ever-opening  avenues  of  eter- 
nal time;  think  of  these  things,  now,  while  God's  beam- 
ing spirit  can  ripen  such  thoughts  into  purposes,  and 
then  determine  whether  you  can  be  mainly  anxious  for 


300  THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES, 

their  intellectual  advancement  or  temporal  happiness; 
whether  you  can  devote  most  thought  and  care  to  fit 
them  for  success  in  this  passing  life;  whether  you  can 
allow  indolence,  or  earthliness,  or  occupation,  to  lead  you 
to  neglect  their  spi;itual  nurture  and  admonition  !  0 
that  one  shriek  of  one  lost  child  could  be  made  to  pene- 
trate the  households  of  many  careless  Christian  parents, 
and  wake  them  from  that  neglect  of  the  young  immortals 
committed  to  their  charge,  which  is  but  a  protracted 
murdering  of  their  souls  !  Let  that  shriek  sometimes  ring 
in  the  ear  of  our  fancy,  or  our  stupidity  and  earthliness 
will  drown  the  voice  of  gratitude,  of  affection,  of  con- 
science, and  of  God  !  If  we  should,  by  neglect,  con 
sign  our  child  to  wo,  would  not  that  memory,  taken 
with  us  to  heaven,  make  in  our  breast  a  hell  ?  "  De- 
liver us  from  blood-guiltiness,  O  God  I" 

With  these  solemn  thoughts  upon  our  hearts,  let  us 
look  at  the  position  and  privileges  of  our  children.  Let 
us  review  the  truths  which  have  been  unfolded,  with  a 
vievi'  to  a  practical  use  of  them  in  the  education  and 
training  of  those  whom  God's  providence  has'committed 
to  our  care. 

The  children  of  Christian  parents  are  by  their  birth 
entitled  to  the  blessings  which  belong  to  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  or  Church  of  Christ,  as  Jewish  children  were  to 
the  privileges  of  the  Jewish  Church.  "They  are  mem- 
bers of  a  church,  as  a  king  is  a  sovereign  before  his 
coronation,  or  as  a  soldier  is  such  before  his  military 
oath."'*'     By   circumcision    in   the  one    case,    and  by 

'^  Bishop  Hopkins,  of  Derry.     Doctrine  of  two  Sacraments. 


AND    THE     C'ATECHISM.  301 

Baptism  in  the  other,  those  privileg^es  are  to  be  secured 
to  them  in  solemn  covenant,  with  visible  si^ns  and  seals. 
We  bring  them,  in  their  early  infancy,  to  the  baptismal 
font.  There  we  go  through  no  unmeaning  and  unfruitful 
ceremony,  but  we  enter  into  solemn  covenant,  and  se- 
cure a  real,  spiritual  blessing  for  the  child.  The  deed 
which  conveys  to  the  child  the  remission  of  his  sins  is 
signed  and  sealed.  His  sins  are  thereby  remitted  to  him, 
and  when  he  shall  have  become  of  age  to  understand 
his  privileges,  he  shall  enter  upon  their  possession,  if  he 
do  not  forfeit  them  by  wilful  failure  to  fidfil  the  condi- 
tions upon  which  they  are  promised.  To  use  the  illus- 
tration of  St.  Bernard,  as  found  in  Hooker,  "  God,  by 
sacraments,  givelh  grace,  even  as  honor  and  dignities  are 
given, — an  abbot  made  by  receiving  a  staff,  a  doctor  by 
a  book,  a  Bishop  by  a  ring;  because  he  thatgiveth  these 
pre-eminences  declareth  by  such  signs  his  meaning; 
nor  doth  the  receiver  take  the  same  but  with  effect;  for 
which  cause  he  is  said  to  have  the  one  by  the  other, 
albeit  that  which  is  bestowed  proceedeth  wholly  from 
the  will  of  the  giver,  and  not  from  the  efficacy  of  the 
sign.  "The  idea,"  says  Bishop  Mcllvaine,  "  is,  that 
Baptism  is  said  to  convey  the  benefit  of  the  (rospel, 
precisely  as  an  abbot  is  made  an  abbot  by  receiving  a 
staff.  And  no  further  than  the  delivery  of  the  staff  im- 
plies a  change  in  the  personal  fitness  of  the  receiver  for 
his  office,  does  the  receiving  of  the  visible  sign  and  seal 
of  Baptism  innply  a  spiritual  change  in  the  personal 
fitness  of  the  recipient  for  the  privileges  of  the  Gos- 
pel."*'    The  parents  and  sponsors,  therefore,  feel  that 

««  Oxford  Divinity,  p.  395. 


302  THE    BAPTISMAL    SERVICES, 

the  children  whom  they  bring  to  Baptism  have  had 
conveyed  over  to  them,  by  a  covenant  rite,  the  heaven- 
ly inheritance  ;  that  they  have  became  members  of 
Christ,  children  of  God,  and  inheritors  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven.  All  that  belongs  to  God's  children,  which 
it  is  possible  for  them  to  receive  in  their  present  condi- 
tion, is  conveyed  to  them;  and  all  that  remains  is  se- 
cured to  them  by  promise, — by  a  promise  signed  and 
sealed.  The  thought  and  anxiety  of  the  parent  are 
concentrated,  then,  upon  that  which  remains.  His 
care  is  that  his  child  may  not  fail  to  enter  upon  an  in- 
heritance secured  to  him;  that  he  may  not  forfeit  the 
high  privilege,  first  his  by  birthright,  and  then  his  by  a 
covenant,  to  whose  provisions  God  has  atfixed  his  own 
gracious  seal.  Herein  lies  the  parent's  awful  responsi- 
bility. For  this  ascend  his  earnest  prayers.  Over  this 
his  anxious  fears  sometimes  gather  darkling.  Around 
this,  again,  his  bright  hopes  hang  clustering.  But  on 
this,  also,  his  faith,  grounded  upon  sure  promises,  may 
rest,  if  he  be  faithful  to  the  conditions  on  which  the 
promises  are  made.  On  the  profession  of  faith  and 
repentance  for  himself,  he  knows  that,  in  the  Sacrament 
of  Baptism,  all  the  blessings  of  the  Gospel  are  conveyed 
over  to  his  actual  possession  and  enjoyment, — pardon, 
justification,  i-edemption,  sanctification,  adoption.  On 
the  profession  of  repentance  and  faith  for  his  child,  he 
may  know  as  well,  that  the  same  blessings,  so  far  as  the 
child  is  capable  of  receiving  them,  are  conveyed  to  hiai, 
and  that  the  remainder  of  them  wait  to  meet  his  opening 
capabilities  for  their  reception.  The  promise  is  to  him 
and  to  his  children.     It  is  a  promise  to  himself  on  h'la 


AND    THE    CATECHISM.  303 

personal  faith  and  penitence.  It  is  a  promise  to  his 
child,  on  his  (the  parent's)  profession  of  faith  and  re- 
pentance, and  on  the  condition  that  he  bring  up  his  child 
in  the  nurture  of  the  Lord.  What  a  rich  encouragement 
has  the  parent  here  !  How  may  he  be  animated  to  brinS 
up  the  child  in  the  way  that  he  should  go,  with  such 
sure  guarantees  that  when  he  is  old  he  shall  not  depart 
from  it.  He  may  look  into  God's  Word  and  find  the 
faith  of  one  bringing  a  blessing  to  another,  and  from  this 
principle  of  the  divine  government,  receive  most  animat- 
ing assurances  of  blessing  for  his  child.  He  hears  the 
centurion  say  to  the  Master,  "  Speak  the  word  only,  and 
thy  servant  shall  be  healed;"  and  finds  that  because  of 
this,  the  centurion's  faith,  his  servant  is  healed  in  the 
self-same  hour.  He  hears  the  heart-stricken  ruler  im- 
portunately and  impatiently  cry  out,  "  Sir,  come  down, 
ere  my  child  die  !"  and  sees  Jesus  take  the  maid  by  the 
hand  and  bid  her  to  arise.  Although  he  knows  it  is  a 
principle  of  the  divine  administration  that  each  soul 
stands  individually  responsible  to  God,  so  that  it  is  pos- 
sible for  the  child  consecrated  to  Him,  dedicated  in  faith, 
and  nurtured  in  the  Lord's  admonition,  to  overcome  all 
grace,  and  destroy  himself;  he  knows,  also,  that  it  is 
another  principle  of  the  same  government,  that  the 
father's  faith  shall  win  a  blessing  to  his  child,  and  that 
faithful  nurture  and  admonition  in  the  Lord  has  the 
promise  of  his  blessing.  Therefore,  he  takes  the  child, 
in  strong  faith,  to  the  laver  of  regeneration.  There- 
fore, he  brings  him  up,  with  liveliest  hope,  in  the  Lord's 
nurture.  And  his  labors  and  prayers  shall  not  be  in 
vain.     Experience  proves  that  faith  and  fidelity  to  bap- 


304        THE  BAPTISMAL  SERVICES,  ETC. 

tized  children  are  made  the  instruments  of  their  entrance 
upon  the  enjoyment  of  all  the  privileges  of  the  house- 
hold of  God. 

I  add  but  one  word  more.  If  we  realized  these  truths, 
and  acted  upon  them,  the  sad  spectacle  of  a  whole  con- 
gregation going  up  to  the  Table  of  the  Lord  without  any 
of  their  children,  in  the  r'ays  of  their  youth,  would  not 
be  so  often  witnessed.  The  Church  evidently  contem- 
plates, thatunderthe  training  of  her  catechetical  instruc- 
tion, and  under  the  influences  of  sponsorial  faithfulness, 
the  child  will  become,  or,  rather,  will  not  cease  to  be, 
God's  child,  and  thus  be  fitted  at  an  early  age  for  ratify- 
ing its  baptismal  vows  in  Confirmation,  and  thence 
coming  to  the  Lord's  Table.  Let  us  labor  that  we  and 
our  children  may  not  be  condemned  for  our  failure  to 
fulfil  this  reasonable  anticipation  ! 


XIII. 

€onfuniation. 


The  service  for  Confirmation,  in  connection  with  the 
Catechism,  having  been  already  sufficiently  described, 
we  shall  proceed  at  once  to  speak  of  the  authority  and 
nature  of  the  rite. 

There  are  sorhe  practices  of  the  Apostles  which  we 
learn  were  not  to  be  perpetuated  in  the  Christian  Church, 
by  the  fact  that  no  command  remains  to  continue  them, 
and  no  evidence  appears  that  they  were  meant  to  be  per- 
petual. When,  however,  any  Apostolic  practice  is  con- 
nected with  an  injunction  that  it  be  continued,  as  a 
permanent  rite  or  rule  of  the  Church;  or  when,  without 
a  command  in  so  many  words,  it  is  spoken  of  by  the 
Apostles  as  an  essential  part  of  the  Christian  system; 
and  when  clear  evidence  is  adduced  that,  after  the 
Apostles,  the  Ch«irch  continuously  practised  it  as  a  rite 
of  divine  institution,  then  it  is  to  be  reverently  received 
and  practised.  Then,  instead  of  presumptuously  putting 
our  minds  upon  the  inquiry,  "  Is  it  a  useful  rite  ?"  it 
becomes  us  at  once  to  recognise  it  as  necessarily  so, 
because  by  God  established,  and  to  betake  ourselves, 
with  a  humble  and  grateful  spirit,  to  the  inquiry,  "What 


306  CONFIRMATION. 

are  the  uses  and  blessings  which  God  has  connected  with 
this  divine  institution  ?"  The  rite  of  Confirmation,  as 
retained  in  our  Church,  is  one,  as  we  believe,  not  only 
practised  by  the  Apostles,  but  transmitted  by  them  to 
the  Church  as  one  of  its  perpetual  institutions,  obliga- 
tory upon  all. 

I.  Its  Scriptural  Authority; 

II.  The  Position  which  the  Church  assigns  to  it;  and 

III.  The  Qualifications  necessary  for  it. 

These  are  the  points  to  which  we  shall  direct  our  atten- 
tion. 

I.  The  fact  that  the  Apostles  laid  hands  upon  those 
who  were  baptized,  and  that  therewith  the  baptized  re- 
ceived the  Holy  Ghost,  is  clear.  When  Saul  made 
havoc  of  the  Church,  the  disciples  were  all  scattered 
abroad,  except  the  Apostles.  It  turned  out  to  the  fur- 
therance of  the  Gospel.  They  went  everywhere,  preach- 
ing the  Word.  Among  them  Philip,  the  Deacon,  went 
to  Samaria,  and  so  preached  that  the  Samaritans  believed 
and  "were  baptized,  both  men  and  women."  When 
the  Apostles  at  Jerusalem  heard  of  this,  they  sent  two 
of  their  number,  Peter  and  John,  to  confirm  the  work, 
well  begun;  who,  when  they  came  to  Samaria,  prayed 
for  the  baptized  believers,  and  "  laid  their  hands  on 
them,  and  they  received  the  Holy  Ghost."  Here  is 
the  fa-ct  that  the  Apostles  laid  their  hands  upon  the  bap- 
tized. It  does  not  stand  alone.  In  the  nineteenth 
chapter  of  the  Acts,  St.  Paul  is  mentioned  as  having 
baptized  certain   persons  who   had  before  received  only 


CONFIRMATION.  307 

John's  Baptism,  on  whom  also  he  laid  hands,  and 
who  received  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  now  the  question 
arises,  was  this  custom  regarded  as,  and  designed  to 
be,  perpetual  ?  A  passage  in  the  sixth  chapter  of 
St.  Paul's  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,'  answers  the 
question.  The  Apostle  enumerates  what  he  calls  the 
principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  and  this  is  among 
them.  "  Leaving,  therefore,  the  principles  of  the 
doctrine  of  Christ,  let  us  go  on  to  perfection,  not  laying 
again  the  foundation  of  repentance  from  dead  works, 
and  of  faith  towards  God,  and  of  the  doctrine  of  bap- 
tisms, and  laying  on  of  hands,  and  of  the  resurrection 
of  the  dead,  and  of  eternal  judgment."  Now,  these  are 
all  called  principles  or  fundamentals  of  the  Christian 
doctrine.  We  know  that  repentance  and  faith,  and  the 
resurrection  and  the  judgment,  are  these  first  principles; 
and  we  find  among  them,  as  in  the  same  class,  "bap- 
tism, and  laying  on  of  hands.''''  If  the  former  are  to  be 
retained  as  part  of  the  Christian  system,  so,  equally, 
are  the  latter.  Baptism,  we  know,  from  other  passages, 
is  to  be  retained,  and  "  laying  on  of  hands"  is  here 
placed  in  the  same  position  with  Baptism.  The  only 
doubt  that  could  possibly  arise  is,  whether  the  "  laying 
on  of  hands"  here  spoken  of  is  the  same  mentioned  in 
the  Acts  to  which  we  have  referred;  or  whether  it  may 
not  refer  to  the  laying  on  of  hands  in  ordination,  or  in 
healing  in  the  sick.  It  could  not  refer  to  these  prac- 
tices, because  these  being  confined  to  small  portions  of 
the  Church,   could  not,  with  any  propriety,  be  ranked 

•  Hebrews  i,  6. 


308  CONFIRMATION. 

with  repentance  and  faith,  as  a  first  principle  of  the  doc- 
trine of  Christ.  The  evidence  appears  perfectly  con- 
clusive, that  the  ordinance  was  designed  for  all  time 
and  all  people. 

II.  Bui,  in  the  second  place,  what  is  the  precise  po- 
sition which  we  assign  to  this  ordinance  ? 

1.  We  do  not  rank  it  as  a  Sacrament.  A  Sacrament 
is  instituted  by  Christ,  and  has  an  outward  sign  or  sym- 
bol of  an  inward  and  spiritual  grace.  This  was  institu- 
ted by  the  Apostles  and  has  no  outward  symbol.  (1.) 
We  do  not  regard  it  as  conveying  of  itself,  as  it  did 
when  practised  in  the  age  of  miracles  by  the  Apostles, 
the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  was  the  miraculous  gifts 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  which  the  disciples,  on  whom  the 
Apostles'  hands  were  laid,  received.  As  such  gifts 
were  not  intended  for  all  times  and  all  Christians,  we 
retain  the  rite,  as  we  do  that  of  laying  on  of  hands  in 
ordination,  although  the  miraculous  gifts  which  accom- 
panied that  gesture  in  Apostolic  times  and  by  Apostolic 
hands  have  ceased.  (2.)  Yet  we  do  not  regard  the  rite 
as  a  meaningless  and  profitless  ceremony.  Far  from  it. 
It  has  deep  significance  and  rich  blessing.  When  he 
who  has  been  baptized  thus  stands,  up  according  to 
Christ's  appointment,  through  his  Apostles,  to  renew 
his  oath  of  fidelity  and  consecration,  in  the  presence  of 
men  and  angels,  doubtless,  in  that  moment,  if  his  be  a 
true  and  hearty  consecration — with  the  prayers  of  God's 
people  and  his  own  invoking  the  presence  of  the  pro- 
mised Spirit — doubtless  the  Spirit  of  glory  and  of  God 


CONFIRMATION.  309 

resteth  upon  him.  It  has  to  his  soul  a  solemn  signifi- 
cance.    It  brings  to  his  soul  a  real  blessing. 

2.  Let  us,  then,  examine  the  advantages  of  this  rite 
in  the  case  of  those  who  have  been  baptized  in  infancy. 

In  the  case  of  those  who  have  received  Baptism  in 
infancy,  it  is  manifest  that  some  solemn  rite  or  service 
should  be  established,  that  they  may,  in  their  own 
name  and  person,  make  a  confession  of  Christ  before 
men.  They  cannot  do  it  by  Baptism,  because  that  has 
already  been  performed.  They  cannot  with  propriety 
do  it  by  coming  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  because  that 
blessed  ordinance  is  a  badge  or  token  of  a  discipleship 
already  assumed,  and  a  Christian  profession  already 
made — not  a  Sacrament  b}'  which  it  is  to  be  done. 
This  is  a  rite,  then,  intermediate  between  Baptism  and 
the  Lord's  Supper,  which  precisely  answers  the  end 
of  confessing  Christ  before  men.  In  other  denomina- 
tions, where  it  is  not  adopted,  other  and  human 
devices  are  practised  to  make  this  profession.  This 
has  the  advantage,  however,  as  we  have  seen,  of 
being  divinely  established.  It  was  practised  in  the  ages 
after  the  Apostles,  just  as  uniformly  as  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper.  TertuUian  in  the  second  century,  Cy- 
prian in  the  third,  Jerome  and  Augustine  in  the  fourth, 
all  speak  of  it  as  practised,  and  as  obligatory.  It  is 
practised  in  the  Lutheran  Churches.  Many  who  have 
separated  from  the  Church  have  acknowledged  the 
value  and  the  primitive  institution  of  the  rite.  Calvin 
owns  it  to  be  primitive  and  useful.  Baxter  has  written 
a  long  treatise  explaining  and  commending  it.  A  strong 
testimony  to  its  primitive  use   and   its   importance   is 


3  to  <;ONFIRMATION. 

found  in  a  report  made  some  years  since,  to  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United 
States,  by  a  committee  appointed  for  that  purpose,  on 
the  best  method  of  treating  those  who  had  been  bap- 
tized. "  It  appears,  (says  the  report,)  that  a  rite  called 
Confirmation,  was  administered  by  the  hand  of  the 
Minister  or  Bishop  or  Elder,  together  with  prayer,  on 
baptized  children  of  a  certain  age."  "This  right  of 
Confirmation,"  continues  the  report  in  another  place, 
"  thus  administered  to  baptized  children,  when  arrived 
at  competent  years,  and  previously  instructed  and  pre- 
pared for  it,  with  the  express  view  of  their  admission  to 
the  Lord's  Supper,  shows  clearly  that  the  primitive 
Church,  in  her  purest  days,  exercised  the  authority  of  a 
mother  over  her  baptized, "  That  this  rite  was  elevated 
to  the  dignity  of  a  sacrament,  and  connected  with  super- 
stitious usages,  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  furnishes  no 
reason  why  we  should  relinquish  it  Acknowledged 
even  by  those,  who  do  not  retain  it  to  have  been  of 
Apostolic  institution  and  primitive  use,  our  Church, 
here  as  elsewhere,  with  wise  moderation,  retained  its 
use  while  it  threw  ofl^"  its  abuses.  It  understood  the 
simple,  useful  distinction  between  removing  an  excres- 
cence and  cutting  off  a  limb. 

3.  The  use  and  advantages  of  the  rite,  when  perform- 
ed in  the  case  of  those  who  are  baptized  in  infancy,  is, 
however,  acknowledged  by  some  who  do  not  seem  to 
recognise  its  propriety  in  the  case  of  those  who  are  bap- 
tized in  riper  years.  To  this  point  we  would  direct  a 
few  observations. 

(1.)  It  should  be  sufficient  to  say,  that  we  have  the 


CONFIRMATION.  311 

authority  of  Scripture  for  the  practice.  Both  the  re- 
corded instances  of  Confirmation  in  the  eighth  and  nine- 
teenth chapters  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  to  which 
we  have  referred,  are  of  this  kind.  Those  whom  St. 
Philip  baptized  in  the  one  case,  and  St  Paul  in  the 
other,  ^ere  adults.  St.  Paul  administered  the  rite  im- 
mediately after  Baptism.  And  so,  "  in  primitive  times, 
when  many  persons  were  baptized  together  on  the 
vigils  of  Eastel-,  Pentecost,  and  Epiphany,  in  the  pre- 
sence or  by  the*  hands  of  the  Bishop,  the  newly  bap- 
tized, after  ascending  from  the  water,  were  immediately 
confirmed  by  him,  with  imposition  of  hands  and  prayer 
for  the  Holy  Ghost."  -  Now,  if  this  rite  were  but  of  ec- 
clesiastical institution,  yet  as  it  is  an  ordinance  of  the 
Church,  not  repugnant  in  spirit  or  in  form  from  other 
Scriptural  institutions,  it  would  seem  that  those  who 
have  the  mind  of  the  Master  would  gladly  comply  with 
it  without  question  and  without  cavil.  The  Saviour 
submitted  to  the  rite  of  Baptism,  although  it  was  not 
provided  for  in  the  Jewish  law,  and  was  but  a  regula- 
tion of  the  Jewish  Church,  and  although,  as  a  sinless 
being,  it  was  not  personally  applicable  to  himself.  This 
he  did,  he  declares,  "  that  he  might  fulfil  all  righteous- 
ness." If  it  should  seem  t<  any  person  to  be  in  his 
case  unnecessary,  because  he  had  just  taken  the  vows 
of  Baptism  in  his  riper  years,  this  example  of  the  Sa- 
viour will  still  show  him  that,  inasmuch  as  this  is  a  resu- 
lation  of  the  church  to  which  he  belongs,  it  becomes 
him  to  submit  to  it  that  he  may,  in  like  manner,  "  fulfil 
all  righteousness." 

'Palmer  on  the  Liturgy,  vol.  ii. 


312  CONFIRMATION. 

(2.)  But  we  can  see,  I  think,  in  several  particulars, 
the  great  advantages  and  important  uses  of  this  rite 
when  administered  even  to  those  who  have  passed  the 
baptismal  vow  in  their  riper  years.  It  is  the  renewal 
of  the  solemn  oath  or  vow  to  a  higher  authority;  to  the 
highest  officer  of  the  Church  on  earth;  to  the  one  who, 
by  divine  appointment,  in  an  eminent  and  peculiar 
sense,  stands  as  his  representative  on  earth.  This, 
surely,  fortifies  the  consecration  of  the  soul  to  God  by 
new  and  solemn  sanctions.  It  is  well  known  that  the 
same  responsibility  assumed  and  the  s-ame  vow  passed 
to  one  holding  delegated  authority,  remotest  from  its 
source,  is  not  so  fully  felt  as  when  it  is  renewed  to  one 
who  is  nearest  to  the  power  by  whom  the  obligation  and 
the  vow  are  imposed.  It  is  a  principle  understood  and 
acted  upon  in  business  transactions,  in  the  higher  insti- 
tutions of  learning,  in  political  and  military  affairs.  The 
Roman  soldier  gave  in  his  vow  of  fidelity  to  his  stand- 
ard, when  he  was  enrolled,  to  some  subordinate  officer 
of  the  legion;  but  we  may  well  suppose  it  to  have  been 
then  most  deeply  felt  and  most  earnestly  purposed, 
when  the  assembled  army,  under  circumstances  calcu- 
lated to  give  impressiveness  to  the  event,  simultaneously 
renewed  their  great  sacramentum,  or  oath  of  fealty,  di- 
rectly to  the  Imperator,  who  stood  surrounded  by  the 
uplifted  eagle  standards,  the  immediate  representative 
of  the  majesty  and  authority  of  world-conquering  Rome. 
And  so  we  may  well  believe  that  those  who  have  sepa- 
rately spoken  the  Baptismal  vow,  to  one  of  the  lower 
orders  of  the  Ministry  of  the  Church,  when  they  stand 
together  before  the  chief  Minister  of  Christ,  and  renew 


CONFIRMATION.  313 

to  him  the  solemn  consecration,  will  brace  their  hearts 
with  more  earnest  purpose,  feel  their  obligation  with 
more  solemn  realization,  enjoy  the  privileges  and  glory 
of  their  position  with  a  more  quickly  beating  heart,  and 
lift  their  prayers  for  aid  with  more  simplicity  and  fervor. 
The  strength  of  this  conjirmation  of  their  vows  and  pur- 
poses will  abide  with  them.  One  advantage  of  this  rite, 
then,  is  found  in  its  adaptation  to  the  nature  and  needs 
of  the  soul.  We  surely  should  welcome  an  institution, 
which  surrounds  the  profession  of  the  faith  of  Christ 
crucified  with  such  constraining  and  impressive  sanc- 
tions. 

(3.)  But  there  is  a  higher  use  and  significancy  in  this 
rite  than  any  of  which  we  yet  have  spoken.  It  corres- 
ponds with  the  processes  of  the  spiritual  life.  Christ 
has  instituted  two  great  Sacraments  as  outward  and 
visible  signs  of  the  two  great  and  marked  eras  of  the 
spiritual  life — its  commencement  and  its  development. 
They  are  not  only  signs  of  these  conditions  of  the  soul, 
and  seals  set  to  them  by  God  that  he  now  owns  and 
blesses  them,  but  when  embraced  in  faith  and  love,  are 
means  to  insure  the  reality  and  develop  the  powers  of 
the  spiritual  life.  Baptism  is  the  sign  and  seal  of  the 
new  birth  unto  righteousness,  and  in  the  case  of  those, 
who,  in  penitence  and  faith  come  to  it,  the  means 
whereby  that  birth  becomes  completed;  the  means 
without  which,  as  the  general  rule,  it  would  be  abor- 
tive. The  Lord's  Supper  is  that  on  which  the  renewed 
soul  has  its  confirmed  life  developed.  Something,  then, 
it  would  seem,  sliould  intervene,  that  the  new  life 
obtained  may  be  guarded  and  secured  before  it  be  pre- 
14 


314  CONFIRMATION. 

maturely  supplied  with  that  which  is  to  nourish  and 
increase  it.  Baptism  is  that  Sacrament  in  which  for- 
giveness of  sins  is  conveyed  and  signed  and  sealed. 
Confirmation  is  the  rite  in  which  the  soul  pardoned, 
comes  once  to  be  renewed,  to  be  confirmed  and  strength- 
ened, and  forever  settled  in  its  new  character,  as  conse- 
crate to  God,  and  belonging  to  the  Saviour.  The  Lord's 
Supper  is  that  holy  Sacrament  in  which  the  soul,  thus 
fixed  in  its  new  character,  comes  to  Christ  repeatedly 
that  its  new  life  may  be  developed,  that  it  may  feed  on 
the  heavenly  banquet  and  grow  thereby.  Confirmation 
promotes  the  estabHshment  of  the  soul  fixedly  in  its 
new  state  obtained  in  Baptism,  that  it  may  surely  be  in 
that  state,  and  in  no  other.  The  Lord's  Supper  pro- 
motes the  progress  of  the  soul  in  that  new  state  thus 
firmly  fixed  in  Confirmation.  In  the  case  of  the  new- 
born child,  care  is  taken  that  its  life  be  first  guarded 
and  insured,  before  heed  be  given  for  its  nourishment. 
Here  we  see  a  succession  of  means  and  signs  suited  to 
the  succeeding  conditions  of  the  soul.  It  need  hardly  be 
remarked,  that  the  blessings  which  we  here  describe  as 
resulting  from  a  participation  of  these  several  or(ii- 
nances,  are  realized  only  in  the  case  of  those  who  bring 
to  these  ordinances  that  spiritual  preparation  without 
which  they  can  neither  convey  nor  seal  a  blessing.  I 
think  that  the  wants  of  every  soul,  new  born  to  God,  indi- 
cate the  use  and  necessity  of  this  rite.  The  true  disciple 
of  the  Saviour  feels  a  reluctance  to  pass  at  once  from  the 
baptismal  font  to  the  Lord's  Table.  His  spiritual  instincts 
seem  to  admonish  him  tl.at  some  intervening  rite  shoidd 
introduce  him  to  the  high  ]jrivilege  of  commemorating 


CONFIRMATION.  315 

his  Saviour's  dying  love,  with  his  tried  and  accepted  dis- 
ciples. It  does  not  seem  right  that  he,  just  from  the 
ungodly  world,  which  crucify  Christ  afresh,  should  rush 
with  the  stain  of  its  contaminations  so  fresh  upon  his 
soul,  and  the  words  of  mocking,  it  may  be,  so  lately 
upon  his  lip,  to  that  blessed  festival,  where  Christ's 
death  is  commemorated  as  the  joy,  the  hope,  the  glory 
of  the  soul.  Finding,  then,  this  rite  to  rest  on  Scrip- 
tural authority,  sanctioned  by  primitive  custom,  and  to 
occupy  a  position  which  makes  it  correspond  to  the 
progress  of  the  divine  life,  and  the  wants  of  the  con- 
verted heart,  we  feel  constrained  to  urge  it  upon  all; 
and,  like  the  Apostle,  when  we  speak  of  the  funda- 
mentals or  first  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  to 
join  to  the  doctrine  of  Baptism  that  of  laying  on  of 
hands.' 

^The  following  extracts,  from  the  work  of  Baxter,  to  whicli 
reference  has  been  made,  contain  a  view  of  the  position  and  bless- 
ing of  this  ordinance  similar  to  what  has  been  given  above. 

"  Proposition  12.  This  solemn  investiture  on  personal  profes- 
sion, being  thus  proved  the  ordinance  of  God,  for  the  solemn  re- 
newing of  the  covenaai  of  grace,  between  God  and  the  adult  cove- 
nanter, it  must  needs  follow  that  it  is  a  corroborating  ordinance, 
and  that  corroborating  i: race  is  to  be  expected  in  it  from  God  by  all 
that  come  to  it  in  sincerity  of  heart ;  and  so  it  hath  tlie  name  of 
Confirmation  on  that  account,  also. 

"The  Papists  quarrel  with  us,  and  curse  us  in  the  Council  of 
Trent,  for  denying  their  creed  of  Confirmation  and  making  it 
another  thing.  But  they  falsely  describe  our  opinion.  We  do  not 
take  it  to  be  a  mere  catechising,  or  receiving  the  catechised  to  the 
Lord's  Supper,  or  to  a  higher  form  ;  but  we  take  it  to  be  the  appro- 
bation of  the  personal  profession  of  them  tlmt  claim  a  title  to  the 
Church   state,  and   privilege  of  the  adult,  and  an  investing  them 


316  CONFIRMATION. 

III.  Having  thus  contemplated  the  Scriptural  autho- 
rity for,  and  assigned  to  its  true  position,  the  rite  of 
Confirmation,  we  now  proceed  briefly  to  speak  of  the 
qualifications  required  on  the  part  of  those  who  are  its 
recipients. 

The  knowledge  required  is  placed  at  a  low  standard, 
that  the  uninstructed  and  the  young,  whose  hearts  are 
turned  to  Christ,  may  not  be  excluded  from  the  privileges 
of  his  Church.  The  Creed,  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the  Ten 
Commandments,  and  the  Catechism,  are  specified  in  the 
Confirmation  Service.  But  surely  none  would  contend 
that  it  is  a  sufficient  qualification  to  be  able  to  repeat 
these  formularies.  The  Confirmation  Service  is  an  as- 
sumption and  repetition  of  the  vov/s  of  Baptism.  Of 
course,  then,  the  spiritual  qualifications  required  in 
Adult  Baptism  are  required  in  Confirmation.  That 
which  is  required  of  persons  to  be  baptized,  is  repentance, 
whereby  they  forsake  sin,  and  faith,  whereby  they  stead- 
fastly believe  the  promises  of  God  made  in  that  Sacra- 
ment. He  who  assumes  the  vows  of  Baptism,  thereby 
fully  and  unreservedly  consecrates  himself  to  God's 
service.  He  who  is  confirmed  does  the  same.  He 
promises  obediently  to  keep  God's  holy  will  and  com- 

solemnly  therein  upon  the  solemn  renewal  (and  personal  adult 
entrance)  into  covenant  with  God.  Now,  in  this  renewed  covenant, 
as  they  give  up  themselves  to  Christ  afresh,  and  personally  engage 
themselves  to  him,  and  renounce  his  enemies,  owning  their  Infant 
Baptism  when  this  was  done  by  others  in  their  names ;  so  God  is 
ready,  on  his  part,  to  bless  his  own  ordinance  with  the  collation  of 
that  corroborating  grace  which  the  nature  of  the  new  covenant  doth 
import." — Baxter '.s  Practical  Works,  vol.  iv,  p.  30G. 


CONFIRMATION. 


317 


mandments,  and  to  walk  in  the  same  all  the  days  of  his 
life.  In  so  doing,  he,  of  course,  promises  to  obey  the 
injunction  of  the  Savioyr,  to  commemorate  the  Saviour's 
dying  love  in  the  Lord's  Supper.  What  is  required  of 
those  who  come  to  the  Lord's  Supper  ?  is,  then,  a  ques- 
tion which  applies  to  the  candidate  for  Confirmation. 
For  in  preparing  for  the  rite,  he  is  preparing,  also,  for 
the  Sacrament  to  which  it  introduces  him.  He  who 
comes  to  the  wedding  of  the  great  King,  must  wear,  in 
his  passage  through  the  ante-room,  the  same  wedding 
garment  which  will  be  required  when  he  is  introduced 
into  the  ban(jueting-hall.  He  is  to  examine  himself, 
whether  he  truly  repents  of  his  former  sins,  steadfastly 
purposes  to  lead  a  new  life,  has  a  lively  faith  in  God's 
mercy  through  Christ,  with  a  thankful  remembrance  of 
his  death,  and  is  in  charity  with  all  men.  In  short,  is  his 
heart  converted  from  the  love  of  sin  to  the  love  of  holi- 
ness, from  the  service  of  Satan  and  the  world  to  the 
service  of  God  and  his  cause  ?  Is  it  fixed  with  the 
earnestness  of  gratitude  for  the  mercies  of  Redemption, 
in  its  purpose  of  serving  God,  as  not  only  its  duty,  but 
its  joy,  its  proper  end,  its  only  sufficient  portion  ?  Then 
let  him  come  to  this  sacred  ordinance,  and  the  blessing 
of  God  will  re»t  upon  him  ! 

Let  all  those,  then,  who  are  to  be  admitted  to  this 
holy  ordinance  prepare  to  come  in  the  spirit  of  a  true, 
cheerful,  and  entire  consecration.  Come,  as  those  who 
flee  from  near  and  pursuing  wrath.  Come,  hungering 
and  thirsting  after  righteousness.  Come,  with  the  love 
of  God  in  your  heart,  and  praises  of  redeeming  mercy 
upon  your  lips.  Come,  as  those  who  see  life  and  its 
vanities  fading  and  dying,  and  eternity  with  its  glories 


318 


CONFIRMATION. 


opening  and  brightening  before  your  eye.  Come,  as  those 
who  are  hurrying  over  life's  brief  barrier  to  judgment, 
and  its  solemn  awards  for  bliss  or  wo.  Come,  with 
your  loins  girded  and  your  lamps  burning,  waiting  with 
eager  expectancy  the  coming  of  your  Lord.  Come,  as 
the  redeemed  children  of  the  Lord,  with  everlat^ting  joy 
upon  your  heads.  Come  to  this  rite,  as  to  the  starting- 
point  whence,  earth  forsaken,  Satan  trampled,  death 
defied,  hell  vanquished  through  Christ  your  strength, 
you  spring  forward  upon  the  path  of  life,  heeding  not 
that  it  be  narrow,  difficult,  and  sharp,  because  its  termi- 
nation— seen  by  faith  over  death's  dark  stream,  to  rise 
with  its  golden  spires  in  the  light  of  the  Lamb — is  the 
city  which  hath  foundations,  whose  maker  and  builder 
is  God  ! 

But  there  are  others,  besides  those  who  have  resolved 
to  come  to  this  ordinance,  for  whom  this  subject  should 
possess  urgent  interest — those  who  have  not  resolved  to 
come.  It  is  a  duty  which  calls  loudly  upon  all  those 
young  persons  who  have  arrived  at  an  age  now  for  Uie 
first  time  to  assume  the  vows  of  Baptism,  or  to  take  upon 
themselves  those  which  were  spoken  for  them  in  their 
infancy.  It  is  a  great  mistake  to  suppose,  as  many  of 
you  do,  that  it  is  perfectly  innocent  in  you  to  neglect 
this  duty;  that  you  have  a  perfect  right  to  hve  without 
God  if  you  choose.  No  creature  is  at  any  period  free 
from  the  obligation  to  love  and  serve  his  God.  It  is  an 
obligation  born  with  the  soul,  and  which  will  die  only 
when  eternity  shall  die.  It  is  on  you,  and  no  power 
can  move  it  off.  And  some  of  you  have  the  obligation 
of  distinct  vows  laid  upon  you  in  addition  to  the  general 
obligation  laid  upon  all  to  serve  the  Lord.     The  mark  of 


CONFIRMATION.  319 

the  cross  is  upon  your  forehead,  and  the  vows  of  your 
parents  and  sponsors   are  on  your   soul — on   your  soul, 
because  they  promised  for  you  what  it  is  your  duty  lo 
perform.     Do  you   remember  that  you  are  dedicated  to 
Gt)d  ?     Does  it  ever  occur  to  you  that  you  are  under 
vows  to  renounce   the  world,  the   flesh,  and  the  devil  ? 
Do  you  say  that  you   have  not  assumed   those  vows  } 
Will  you,   then,   renounce  them  ?     You  must  do  some- 
thing  with  them.      Will  you   renounce   them  ?     Go  to 
some  of  the   Altars  of  Mammon,  or  of  Moloch,  or  of 
Belial,   erected   at  so   many  corners  and  in    so    many 
households,   and  before  those  gods   of  this  world,   but 
miserable  fiends  in  their  own  world,  breathe  the  horrid 
renunciation,  and  strike  the  horrid  compact, — "  1  cast  on 
your  bla/ing  altar  the  vows  of  my  infancy,  offered  with 
the  grateful  and   hopeful   prayers   of  a   father's   and  a 
mother's  love;  I  efface  the  mark  of  the  cross  from    my 
forehead,  and  stamp  on  it  thy   burning  brand;  and  now 
give  me  gold,  give  me  fame,  give  me  pleasure,  satisfy 
my  lust,  and  I  am  yours — yours  ibr  time  and  for  eterni- 
ty, for  earth  and  hell  !"     But  you  are  not  ready  for  this 
horrible  proceeding.     Yoi^  cannot  make  up  your  mind  to 
renounce  your  vows.      But  you  must  do  something  with 
them.      By  refusing  to  assume,  do  you  not  virtually,  must 
you  not   eventually,   renounce    tliem  ?     Assume  them, 
then;  assume   them  now,   before  the   opportunity  shall 
have  passed — now,  when  God  calls.      For  what  is  the 
vow  ?     Not  to  a  hard  and  miserable  service,  but  to  a  free 
and  happy  one.     It  is  a  vow  to  escape  the  present  curse 
and  discomfort  of  sin,  and  its  eternal  punishment.      It  is 
a  vow  to   become  a  pure,  a  holy,  an  exalted,  a  blissful 
being.     It  is  a  vow  which  ensures  peace  to  the  spirit 


320  CONFIRMATION. 

^hich  is  so  often  agitated;  triumph  over  pain;  joy  in  the 
midst  of  tribulation;  songs  in  the  night-time  of  affliction; 
in  death,  strength  and  victory;  in  departure  into  the 
world  of  spirits,  blessed  angels  for  your  escort;  in  the 
day  of  judgment,  Christ  your  Saviour  for  your  Judge;  in 
heaven,  an  innumerable  company  of  angels,  the  spirits 
of  the  just  made  perfect,  and  Jesus,  the  Mediator  of  the 
New  Covenant,  and  God  the  source  of  all  blessedness, 
for  your  eternal  portion  !  It  is  a  vow,  too,  which  you 
will  find  it  far  easier  to  make  and  keep  in  youth  than  in 
any  other  period.  The  virus  of  sin  has  not  so  long 
worked  in  your  spiritual  system  but  that  the  great  Physi- 
cian can  arrest  its  spread.  Heaven,  which  lies  about 
us  in  our  infancy,  is  not  yet  so  far  removed  from  you  as 
to  have  lost  all  its  attraction  for  your  heart.  Conscience 
is  yet  tender.  Habits  of  sin  and  neglect  of  God  are  even 
now  chains  indeed  to  the  spirit,  but  chains  yet  hot  from 
the  forging  and  not  riveted  by  time,  and,  by  the  grace 
of  God,  to  be  broken  by  him  who  wills  it,  as-  Sampson 
broke  his  green  withes.  The  Spirit,  though  grieved,  is 
not  quenched  within  your  heart.  Come,  then,  for  all 
"things  are  now  ready.  Counting  over  God's  blessings  to 
you  as  a  sinful  creature,  adopt  the  language  of  the  pious 
Psalmist,  "  What  shall  I  render  unto  the  Lord  for  all 
his  benefits  towards  me  ?  I  will  pay  my  vows  unto  the 
Lord,  now.)  in  the  presence  of  all  his  people." 

But  this  subject  concerns  not  only  the  young,  but  all 
those  who  have  neglected  to  dedicate  themi^elves  to  God, 
and  those  most  who  have  neglected  it  longest.  And 
some  of  my  readers  may  have,  if  not  in  Baptism,  yet 
otherwise,  laid  themselves  under  vows  to  serye  the  Lord. 
They  are  recorded  in  heaven.     We  call  iipon  you  now 


CONFIRMATION.  321 

to  fulfil  Iheni.      Remember  !  when  you  were  ill  and  near 
to  death,  and  you  prayed  to  God  to  raise  you  up,  did  you 
not  vow  that  your  lite  should  be  the  Lord's  ?     Remem- 
ber !   when  you  were  f^tricken  down  in  sorrow,  and  the 
liujhl  went  out  in  your  dwelling,  and  the  world  seemed 
dreary,  and   you    could  not   be   comforted   by  its  poor 
consolations,  and  \'ou  went  to  God  for  comfort,  and  he 
sent  you  strength,  did  you  not  then  promise  yourself  to 
him  ?     What    has   become    of  those    vows  ?     Did   you 
mean  to  deceive  the  Almighty  ?     Did  you  mean  to  bribe 
him  to  give  you  comfoit,  or  extend  your  life,  while  you 
had  no  intention  to  perform  those  vows  ?     O,  no  !     You 
are  not  so  vile  a  hypocrite  as  that.     You  are  but  a  sinful 
creature,  who  knew  not  your  own  weakness,  whose  fears 
-and  sorrows  wrung  from  you  a  promise  which  a  blinded 
conscience  and  a  worldly  heart  have  since  allowed  you 
to  neglect.     But  did  you  vow  any  thing  more  thans^ou 
ought  to  do  ?     Is  not  the  obligation,   then,  full  on  your 
soul }      Has    God    forgotten   it  ?      Remember    that   all 
events  and  thoughts  and  speech  and  actions  are,  in  the 
sunlight  of  his  all-knowing  mind,    distinctly  daguerre- 
otyped,  as  they  pass,  on  the  tablets  of  eternity.     When 
those  vows  were   made,  perhaps  you  earnestly  declared 
to  God  that  you  had  rather  die  than  live  to  break  them. 
Perhaps  you  invoked  his  righteous  wrath  upon  you  if 
you  should.      But    he   has  not  taken  you   at  your  word. 
He  has  prolonged  your  life.     He  has  given  you  oppor- 
tunity and  space  to  repent.     O,  does  he  not  wait  to  be 
gracious  ?     Is  he  not  slow  to  anger  ?     What  can  you  do 
for  his  benefits  ?     Pay  your  vows  unto  the  Lord  now, 
in  the  presence  of  all  his  people  ! 
14* 


XIV. 

illatrlinonn,  Dieltation  of  *l)c  Sirk,  ^f. 


As  marriage  is  a  divine  institution,  the  Church  has 
properly  determined  that  it  shall  be  solemnized  with 
impressive  religious  services.  Her  children  are  sum- 
moned to  the  Church  of  God,  and  in  his  presence  and 
to  his  Minister  pronounce  the  vows  of  mutual  and  per- 
petual fidelity  and  love. 

None  of  her  services  has  been  so  much  modified  and 
improved  as  the  form  for  the  solemnization  of  Matri- 
mony. As  it  stands  in  our  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  it 
is  one  of  the  most  perfect  of  our  services.  The  English 
form,  which  remains  nearly  the  same  as  at  the  first,  is 
protracted  to  an  undue  length,  and  is  defaced  with  many 
unnecessary  expressions,  which  are  offensive  to  the  taste 
of  the  present  age.  A  large  portion  of  it,  however,  as 
we  are  informed  by  Shepherd,  is  usually  omitted  at  the 
present  day. 

By  the  first  rubric  it  is  declared,  that  the  Ministers 
are  left  to  the  direction  of  the  laws  of  the  several  States 
in  which  they  reside,  in  every  thing  that  regards  the 
civil  contract  between  the  parties.     The  English  rubric 


MATRIMONY.  323 

enjoins  that  (lie  banns'  be  proclaimed  three  several  times 
in  divine  service  before  the  marriage  may  be  solemnized. 
The  last  rubric  provides  that  the  parties  to  be  married 
shall  come  int  j  "the  body  of  the  Church,"  or  shall  be 
ready  "in  some  proper  house,"  with  their  friends  and 
neighbors,  and  there  standing  together,  the  man  on  the 
right  hand  and  the  woman  on  the  left,  shall  proceed 
with  the  service.-  The  English  Church  has  provided 
by  Canon,  (the  Ixii,)  that  the  marriage  be  solemnized 
in  one  of  the  Churches  in  which  the  banns  have  been 
published. '  It  not  only  forbids  marriage  elsewhere  than 
in  the  Church,  but  it  also  enjoins  certain  hours — that  is, 
between  the  hours  of  eight  and  twelve  in  the  morning — 
in  which  alone  marriages  may  be  celebrated.  (Canons 
Ixii  lind  cii.)  These  arrangements  were  intended  to 
prevent  clandestine  marriages,  and  to  secure  the  sobriety 
and  decency  which  become  so  sacred  a  ceremony.     It 

'  Dr.  Nichols  derives  this  word  from  a  barharous  latin  word 
bannum,  or  bandiun,  whi^^h  signifies  a  proclamalion. 

'The  right  hand  is  the  most  honorable  place,  and  is  therefore 
assi2;ned  by  all  Christian  Churches  to  the  man,  as  head  of  the  wife. 
The  Jews  place  the  woman  on  the  right,  in  allusion  to  the  forty- 
fifth  Psalm.  "At  the  right  hand  did  the  dueen  stand,"  &c. — 
IVhdtely,  p.  483. 

•^  The  greater  ^lart  of  ihe  service  was  formerly  performed  at  the 
church  door.    Chaucer,  in  his  Wife  of  Bath,  alludes  to  the  custom  : 
'*  She  was  a  worthy  woman  all  her  live — 
Husbands  at  the  church  door  had  she  five." 

tVheatUy,  -133. 

The  rubric  of  the  Manuel  of  Salsbury  provides  that  the  man  and 
the  woman  stand  ante  ostium  ecclesia  coram  Deo,  et  sacer(lole,etpopulo, 
before  the  door  of  the  church,  in  the  presence  of  God  and  his  priest 
and  the  people. — Palmer^s  Origines  Lilurgicce,  vol.  ii,  212. 


324  MATRIMONY. 

has  not  been  considered  necessary  or  practicable  to  have 
these  regulations  continued  in  our  Church;  and,  there 
fore,  the  rubric  allows  marriages  to  be  celebrated  in 
"some  proper  house,"  and  limits  the  celebration  of  the 
ceremony  to  no  particular  period  of  the  day.  There  is 
a  manifest  propriety  in  the  celebration  of  the  service  in 
the  Church  ;  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  sentiment  of 
the  Church  will  make  her  children  feel  that  it  is  un- 
becoming, unless  unavoidable,  to  have  the  ceremony 
performed  in  private  houses.  In  a  day  when  the  mar- 
riage tie  is  so  readily  sundered  by  legislatures  and  courts 
of  justice  ;  and  when  disorganizing  socialisms  would  de- 
grade the  sacred  union  into  a  mere  human  compact,  the 
Church  should  do  every  thing  in  her  power  to  throw 
around  it  the  solemn  sanctions  which  guard  a  divine 
institution. 

After  a  declaration  that  marriage  "  is  honoi  able  among 
all  men,"  those  who  can  show  just  cause  why  the  par- 
ties may  not  lawfully  be  joined  together,  are  bidden  to 
speak,  or  else  forever  after  to  hold  their  peace.  In  a 
yet  more  solemn  manner  the  parties  themselves  are 
adjured  to  confess,  if  they  know,  any  iiiipediment  why 
they  may  not  lawfully  be  joined  together. 

The  impediments  contemplated  by  the  Church  in  this 
country  are  not  identical  with  those  which  exist  in  Eng- 
land. The  latter  are  specified  in  the  xcix  and  cii  Canons 
of  the  Church.  They  are:  1.  A  preceding  contract  or 
marriage.  2.  Consanguinity  or  affinity;  and  3,  Want  of 
consent  of  parents  and  guardians.  The  prohibited  de- 
grees of  consanguinity  or  affinity  are  set  forth  in  a  table 
published  in  1563,  and  are  affixed  to  most  of  the  English 


MATRIMONT. 


325 


PiavPi  Books/  The  other  two  clashes  ■•  of  impediments 
are  neated  by  the  civil  and  ecclesiastical  laws  of  the 
kingdom. 

It  mi.^ht  be  tlithcult  lor  a  clergyman  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  in  this  country  to  determine  what  alleged  im- 
pediinriits  should  arrc>t  him  in  the  pciformance  of  the 
marriage  s;ervice.  Whatever  was  alleged  to  be  incon- 
sistent with  the  law  of  the  land  would  of  course  arrest 


■•  It  is  thought  advisable  to  adjoin  the  English  table  of  prohibited 
degrees : 

^  Man  may  not  marry  kis  A  Woman  may  not  marry  with  her 


1  p  RA^nMOTHKK, 

2  Ij  Grail. Itaiher's  VVit"«, 

3  Wil'eS  Grniuliiiotlier. 

4  Father's  aisrcr, 

5  JVlolhf  r's  .Sister, 

6  Father'si  Brother's  Wife. 

7  Mother's  Brother's  Wife, 

8  Wi  It's  Father's  Sister, 

9  Wife's  Mother's  Sister. 

10  Mother, 

11  .Stf.p-Mother, 

12  VVifes  .Mother. 

13  Daughter, 

14  Wife's  Daughter, 

15  Son's  Wife. 

16  .-^ister, 

17  Wife'*  Sister, 

18  Brother's  Wife. 

19  Son's  OallshtPr, 

■ii.t  naushler's  Daughter, 

•21  .'iHx-->  <on's  Wife. 

•m  Uauehter's  Son's  Wife, 

■.i-t  Wife's  Son's  Daughter, 

24  Wife's  Daughter's  Daughter. 

25  Brother's  Daughter, 

26  Sister's  Daughter, 

27  Brother's  Son's  Wife 

■1H  Sister's  Son's  Wife. 

•29  Wiie'd  Brother's  Daiigliter, 

30  Wife's  Sister's  Oaushter. 


1  pRANDl   \THER, 

2  VJ  Grandinollier's  Husband, 
J  Husliand's  Grandfather. 

4  Father's  Brother, 

5  Mother's  Brother, 

6  Father's  Sister's  Husband. 

7  Mother's  Sister's  Husband, 

8  Husband's  Father's  Brother, 

9  Husband's  .Mother's  Brother. 

10  Father, 

11  Step  Father, 

12  Husband's  Father, 

13  Son, 

14  Husband's  Son, 

15  Daughter's  Ujisband. 

16  Brother, 

17  Husl>and'3  Brother, 
Ii5  Sister's  Husband. 

19  Son's  Son, 

20  Dau.'hter's  Son. 

21  Son's  Daughter's  Husband, 

•>J  Daughter's  Daughter'*  Husband, 

23  Husband's  Son's  Son, 

24  Husbanil'>  Daughter's  Son. 

25  Brother's  Son, 

26  Sister's  Son, 

27  Brother's  Daughter's  Husband. 

28  .-^i^ter's  Daughter's  Husband, 
2!)  Husband's  Brother's  Son, 
30  Husband's  Sister's  Son. 


*  The  whole  subject  is  amply  treated  in  Wheately,  p.  436-'43. 


326  MATRIMONY. 

him.  Some  things,  however,  which  the  State  aiLows, 
may  not  be  lawful  to  him  as  a  Minister  of  the  Piotestant 
Episcopal  Church.  The  laws  of  the  land  do  not  make 
divorcement  an  impediment  to  marriage.  But  the 
General  Convention  of  1808  expressed,  as  the  sense  of 
the  Church,  that  it  was  inconsistent  with  the  law  of 
God  that  any  person  divorced,  unle.'^s  on  account  of  the 
adultery  of  the  other  party,  should  be  married  again  ;  and 
that  therefore  it  was  improper  for  the  Minister  of  the 
Church  to  officiate  at  such  a  marriage.  This,  however, 
is  the  only  case  of  which  the  writer  is  aware,  in  which 
the  expressed  sense  of  the  Church  is  directly  at  variance 
with  what  is  permitted  by  the  law.  The  law,  however, 
may  allow  what,  as  a  Minister  of  Christ,  acting  on  his 
private  judgment  and  responsibility,  he  would  not  feel 
himself  at  liberty  to  do. 

The  law,  for  instance,  in  Pennsylvania,  allows  a  man 
to  marry  his  brother's  wife,  his  uncle's  wife,  his  niece, 
his  wife's  niece  or  sister,  or  even  her  mother,  and  per- 
haps even  his  half  sister.  In  New  York  it  is  lawful  for 
a  man  to  marry  his  aunt  and  his  niece  by  blood,  his 
father's  wife,  his  wife's  mother,  his  wife's  daughter, 
and  his  wife's  sister.''  It  need  hardly  be  remaiked,  that 
some  of  these  unions  no  clergyman  of  the  Church  would 
be  willing  to  solemnize,  even  if  he  should  be  protected 
by  the  laws  of  the  Church  and  State. 

As,  however,  our  Church  has  not  adopted  the  English 
table  of  prohibited  degrees,  and  has  not  prepared  another, 
and  has  had  no  legislation  upon  the  subject,  each  clergy 

^  Dwight's  Hebrew  Wife,  pp.  55,  71. 


MATRIMONY.  327 

man  is  left  to  act  according  to  his  private  judgment  and 
conscience.  All  marriages,  not  wjthin  the  express  and 
clear  Levitical  interdict,  which  the  private  judgment  of 
the  Minister  does  not  decide  to  be  improper,  may  be 
celebrated  by  him  without  let  or  penalty.  Indeed,  it 
might  be  difficult  to  decide  what  law  or  doctrine  of  the 
Church  would  be  violated  if  a  clergyman  should  marry 
persons  related  within  the  degrees  prohibited  by  the 
Levitical  law.  It  is  true,  that  the  7th  Article  declares 
"  that  no  Christian  man  whatsoever  is  free  from  the 
obedience  of  the  commandments  which  are  called  moral. " 
But  our  Church  has  never  decided  that  these  are  among 
the  moral  commandments.  In  such  case,  no  doubt,  a 
clergyman  would  be  reproved  by  the  just  moral  senti- 
ment of  the  Church ;  but  we  see  not  how  he  would  sub- 
ject himself  to  any  punishment  or  penalty." 

'  The  best  argument  which  we  have  seen  to  prove  that  the  Levit- 
ical prohibitions  are  moral,  and  that  the  case  of  the  wife's  sister 
properly  comes  within  those  prohibitions,  is  Bishop  H.  U.  Onder- 
donk's  "  Considerations  on  Marriages  prohibited  by  the  law  of 
God."  Burnet  abstains  from  calling  them  moral,  and  yet  considers 
that  it  is  proper  to  make  them  perpetually  binding  by  law.  "  There 
may  be  many  things  which  are  not  unalterably  moral  in  themselves, 
which  yet  may  be  fit  subjects  of  perpetual  laws  aljout  them.  For 
instance,  in  the  degrees  of  kmdred  with  relation  to  marriage,  there 
are  no  degrees  but  direct  descendants  or  ascendants  ;  that  is,  parents 
and  children,  that  by  an  eternal  reason  can  never  marry ;  yet  since 
their  marrying  would  be  attended  with  vast  inconveniences,  and 
would  tend  to  the  defilement  of  all  families,  and  hinder  the  coiijuno 
tion  of  mankind  by  the  intermixture  ordifTerent  families,  it  becomes 
likewise  a  fit  subject  for  a  perpetual  law  to  strike  horror  at  the 
thought  of  such  commixtures,  and  so  to  keep  the  world  pure." 

Burnet  on  the  Articles,  p.  121. 


328  MATRIMONy. 

The  principal  practical  question  which  embarrasses 
clergymen  of  the  Church,  is  that  which  arises  when  a 
man  proposes  to  marry  the  sister  of  his  deceased  wife. 
It  is  believed  that  a  great  majority  of  the  Bishops  and, 
clergy  of  the  Church  have  no  scruple  in  solemnizing 
such  marriages.  They  have  been  prohibited  by  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  this 
country;  but  though  the  same  step  has  been  urged  upon 
the  General  Convention  of  our  Church,  with  the  utmost 
strength  of  argument  of  which  the  subject  is  susceptible, 
the  Convention  has  refrained  from  any  legislation,  or 
any  declaration  of  its  sentiments. 

The  questions  proposed  to  the  parties,  the  giving  away 
of  the  bride  by  the  father  or  guardian,*  and  tlie  joining 
of  hands,  with  the  mutual  "pledging  of  their  troth"  each 
to  the  other,  are  portions  of  the  service  which  remain 
in  the  English  Prayer  Book,  and  are  now  precisely  as 
they  were  first  constructed. 

The  giving  of  a  ring  is  spoken  of,  in  the  close  of  the 
service,  as  "  a  token  and  pledge  of  the  covenant"  made 
between  the  parties.  Viewed  in  this  light,  as  a  visible 
and  perpetual  witness  and  seal  of  a  solemn  vow,  the  act 
has  great  beauty  and  propriety.  The  sentiment  of  a  re- 
fined age  has  often  sought  to  find  in  the  ring  elaborate 
symbolical  meanings — in  its  material  the  purity,  and  in 

®"  h  is  to  be  observed  that  the  woman  is  to  be  given,  not  to  the 
man,  but  to  the  minister;  for  the  rubric  orders  that  the  nmiisltr  shall 
receive  her  at  her  father's  or  friends'  iiands,  which  signifies,  to  be 
sure,  that  the  father  resigns  her  up  to  God,  and  that  it  is  God  who 
now,  by  his  priest,  gives  her  in  marriage,  as  he  did  at  first  for 
Adam. ' '—  WheaUey,  p.  448. 


MATRIMONY.  329 

it,.s  form  the  constancy,  of  affection.  And  learning  has 
come  to  its  aid,  and  described  the  ring  in  use  among  the 
early  Christians''  and  the  Romans,  and  its  meaning,  as  a 
hieroglyphic,  among  the  Egyptians.  The  history  of  this 
part  of  the  service  seems  to  show  that  the  custom  of 
giving  a  ring  was  connected  with  a  practice  not  very 
pleasing  to  sentiment  and  sensibility.  The  rubric  of  the 
first  book  directs  that  the  man  shall" give  unto  the  woman 
a  ring  and  oilier  tokens  of  spousage,  as  gold  o?-  silver,  lay- 
ing them  on  the  book."'     The  old  manuel  for  the  use  of 

^  "  To  this  (custom)  Turlullian  alludes  when  he  says :  'No  woman 
was  permitted  to  wear  gold  (aurtim  novat)  saving  only  upon  one 
finger,  which  her  husbanfl  had  pledgei(or  engaged  to  himself)  with 
the  ring  of  espousals.' — J]pol.,  c.  6.  Clemens  Alexandrinus  ex- 
pressly mentions  the  use  of  rings  in  espousals  among  Christians." — 
Key  to  the  Prayer  Book,  p  268. 

'"The  rubric,  which  directs  that  the  ring  should  be  placed  upon 
the  fourth  finger,  has  set  ingenuity  to  work  to  find  some  special 
reasons  why  the /o«rt/j  finger  rather  than  another  should  be  selected. 
The  reason  is  said  to  be,  because  it  was  anciently  believed  that  a 
particular  nerve  or  vain  reached  from  iliere  to  the  heart.  (Pliny 
and  Macrobius  are  appealed  to  as  authority.)  The  writei  is  per" 
suaded  that  the  custom  arose  from  so  simple  a  fact  as  that  it  is  the 
fourth  finger.  In  the  Manuel  of  Salisbury,  from  which  our  Liturgy 
has  borrowed  largely,  immediately  after  the  words  "  witli  this  ring 
I  thee  wed,"  &c.,  follows  the  rubric:  "Then  the  man  shall  place 
the  rin^  upon  the  thumb  of  the  woman,  .saying,  'In  the  name  of  the 
Father;''  then  upon  the  second  finger,  saying,  '/n  the  name  of  the  Son;^ 
then  upon  the  third  finger,  saying,  '/n  the  name  of  the  Holy  Ghost;'' 
then  upon  the  fourth  finger,  saying,  '^imeii."  "  It  can  hardly  be 
doubted  that  when  this  act  of  putting  the  ring  on  different  finders, 
at  the  same  time  with  the  repetition  of  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  was 
omitted,  the  ring  would  naturally  be  placed  where,  under  the  old 
custom,  it  had  been  left — on  the  fourth  finger. 


330  VISITATION    OF    THE    SICK. 

Salisbury  directs  the  minister  to  ask  the  woman's  dowry, 
viz.,  the  tokens  of  spousage."  These  directions  indicate 
that,  however  refined,  in  its  emblematic  meaning,  the 
custom  may  have  originally  been,  yet,  as  it  reached  our 
forefathers,  it  had  lost  its  original  significance  and  had  be- 
come part  of  a  transaction  in  which  the  idea  of  sale  and 
purchase  predominated  over  more  delicate  considerations 
connected  with  the  affections.  The  rings  of  gold  and  silver 
were  pledges  of  the  promised  portion,  and  tokens  of  the 
solemn  engagements  which  the  parties  had  assumed. 
Ages  have  consecrated  the  marriage  ring,  growing  re- 
finement has  dropped  all  gross,  and  gathered  up  all 
beautiful  associations  connected  with  it  in  the  past,  and 
it  now  remains  the  expressive  token  and  pledge  of  a 
solemn  covenant  of  love  even  unto  death. 

The  concluding  part  of  the  service  is  pre  eminently 
beautiful.  Nothing  could  more  fully  express  the  affec" 
tionate  benediction  which  springs  out  of  a  pastor's  heart 
when  he  has  united  loved  members  of  his  flock  in  the 
holy  bonds  of  wedlock  ;  nothing  could  be  more  appro- 
priate when  he  is  about  to  dismiss  them,  that  they  may 
enter  upon  a  sacred  relation,  whose  responsibilities  are 
equal  to  its  joys. 

Visitation  of  the  Sick. 
How  blessed  are  the  consolations  of  religion  and  the 
offices  of  the  ministers  of  God  in  the  chambers  of  sick- 

The  expression,. "With  my  body  I  ihee  worship,'"  which  follows 
the  phrase  "With  this  ring  I  thee  wed,"  in  the  English  service,  was 
wont  to  be  fiercely  attacked  by  the  Puritans.  The  usual  f-xplana- 
tion  of  it  is,  that  the  promise  is  thereby  made  that  every  external 
mark  of  honor  and  respect  sliali  be  rendered. 


VISITATION    OF    THK    SICK.  331 

ness  and  of  death!  The  wearied  and  enfeebled  sufferer 
is  told  that  his  pastor,  from  whom  he  has  so  often  heard 
the  blqssed  truths  of  God  in  the  sanctuary,  is  about  to 
visit  him.  How  is  he  cheered  with  the  announcement! 
For  now  the  truths  of  religion  are  realities.  In  his 
weakness  and  helplessness,  he  realizes  his  dependence; 
He  meditates  on  his  sins  to  hate  them;  he  thinks  of  his 
Saviour  to  bless  him;  he  perceives  the  wonderfulness, 
the  sutliciency,  th.e  blessedness  of  redeeming  love;  he 
knows  the  power  of  the  grace  of  God;  he  sees  him  who 
is  invisible;  the  eternal  world  is  all  around  him,  and 
the  eternal  God  is  directly  over  him.  Or,  if  less  under 
the  power  of  Grace,  or  bowed  down  with  the  conscious- 
ness of  unforgiven  sin,  he  hears  of  the  approach  of  his 
pastor  with  a  trembling  and  timid  hope.  The  room  is 
prepared  for  his  sacred  visiter  and -friend;  the  pillow  is 
smoothed;  the  invalid  is  ready  for  the  interview;  and  the 
first  words  which  falls  upon  his  ear  express  the  blessing 
which  he  craves,  or  the  blessing  which  he  possesses,  in 
measure,  and  of  which  ht;  would  enjoy  the  richer  fidl- 
ness  ! — '■'■Pfinci'  bp  to  this  house,  and  to  all  thai  dwell  in 
itr 

Then  follows  a  short  responsive  service,  with  a  prayer 
and  exhortation.  The  exhortation  wisely  indicates  the 
true  causes  why  sickness  is  sent.  It  may  be  either  to 
try  the  sufferer's  patience,  or  for  an  example  to  others, 
or  to  put  faith  to  the  test,  and  to  strengthen  it,  or  as  a 
chastisement  for  sin.  In  either  case,  it  has  a  mission  of 
grace  and  mercy.  Then  follows  another  longer  exhorta- 
tion, to  be  used  in  case  the  person  visited  be  very  sick. 
It  is  affectionate  and  faithful,  and  is  followed  by  a  rubric 


32  VISITATION    OF    THE    SICK. 

which  directs  the  minister  to  examine  whether  the  sick 
man  truly  repents  of  his  sins,  and  is  in  charity  with  the 
world;  to  forgive  those  who  have  injured  him,  and  ask 
forgiveness  of  those  whom  he  has  injured;  and  to  make 
such  a  disposition  of  his  property  as  the  claims  of  equity 
and  benevolence  demand.  Then  follows  a  collect,  an 
anthem  de profundis^  a  commendation  of  the  sick  to  the 
merc)"^  of  God,  and  a  benediction.  Several  prayers  are 
added,  to  be  used  at  the  discretion  of  the  minister — a 
prayer  "  for  a  sick  child;"  "lor  a  sick  person  when 
there  appeareth  small  hopes  of  his  recovery;"  "a  com- 
mendatory prayer  for  a  sick  person  at  the  point  of 
departure;"  "for  a  person  troubled  in  mind  or  in  con- 
science;" a  prayer  "  in  behalf  of  all  those  present  at  the 
visitation;"  "  a  prayer  in  case  of  sudden  surprise  or 
immediate  danger;"  and  a  "  thanksgiving  for  the  begin- 
ning of  a  recovery." 

Every  part  of  this  service  is  marked  by  its  pure 
scriptural  character.  A  church  that  is  void  of  all  super- 
stition and  false  doctrine  in  reference  to  the  hopes  and 
reliai  ces  of  the  dying,  and  the  condition  of  the  dead, 
may  well  be  supposed  to  be  pure  throughout.  For  in 
death,  more  than  at  any  other  time,  the  heart  tempts  us 
to  superstitions  and  to  false  grounds  of  hope.  Affection 
and  fear  unite  to  induce  us  to  consider  the  departing  in 
a  state  of  safety.  But  here  there  is  no  administration 
of  a  charmed  viaticum;  no  exhortations  to  a  dying  gene- 
rosity, which  shall  atone  for  a  living  selfishness;  no  mer- 
cantile estimate  of  the  good  deeds  of  a  last  hour,  which 
shall  more  than  pay  for  the  evil  deeds  of  years;  no  hasty 
recourse  to  a  cleansing  sacrament,  which  shall  purify 
alike   soul   and   body  into   meetness   for   immortality. 


VISITATION    OF    THE    SICK.  333 

While,  on  the  one  hand,  the  sick  man  is  exhorted,  with 
the  most  searching  fidelity  to  exhibit  "fruits  meet  for 
repentance,"  that  its  reality  may  be  proved;  on  the 
other  hand,  he  is- admonished  that  his  repentance  must 
be  a  sincere  sorrow  of  the  soul  for  sin  against  God,  and 
that  it  must  be  connected  with  that  faith  which  casts 
ilself  on  the  merits  of  the  Saviour,  and  looks  for  pardon- 
ing mercy  only  through  the  blood  of  his  atonement. 
The  sick  person  is  represented  as  putting  "  his  full  trust 
in  God's  mercy,"  and  as  imploring  him  "  not  to  impute 
to  him  his  former  sins."  And  when  all  these  exhorta- 
tions to  repentance  and  to  restitution,  and  equity  and 
charity,  have  been  made,. and  are  supposed  to  have  been 
complied  with,  and  the  dying  sufferer  is  about  to  appear 
in  the  presence  of  God,  with  what  importunate  and  im- 
pressive earnestness  is  that  soul  committed  to  atoning 
jpercy! — "Wash  it,  we  pray  thee,  in  the  blood  of  that 
immaculate  Lamb  that  was  slain  to  take  away  the  sins 
of  all  the  world;  that  whatever  defilements  it  may  have 
contracted  in  the  midst  of  this  miserable  and  naughty 
world,  through  the  lusts  of  the  flesh  or  the  wiles  of 
Satan,  being  purged  and  done  away,  it  may  be  presented 
pure  and  without  spot  before  thee." 

In  the  Liturgy  of  Edward,  the  143d  Psalm  is  placed 
at  the  beginning  of  the  service,  and  in  the  first  prayer 
reference  is  made  to  the  recovering  of  Peter's  wife's 
mother,  and  "the  captain's  servant,"  as  also  to  "Thobie 
and  Sara."  The  form  of  the  absolution,  which  is  still 
retained  in  the  EngUsh  service,  as  we  have  had  occa- 
sion previously  to  remark,  is  absolute  and  authoritative. 
The  form   of  anointing  the  sick,  and  the  prayer  that 


334  COMMUNION   OF   THE    SICK. 

followed  it  in  the  first  Liturgy  of  Edward,  was  omitted 
in  the  second.  The  omission,  on  the  part  of  our  Church, 
of  the  form  of  absolution,  indicates  the  jealousy  of  our 
fathers  to  avoid  unfounded  assumptions  of  priestly 
power." 

The  Communion  of  the  Sick. 

Little  need  be  said  in  vindication  of  the  Communion 
of  the  Sick.  Least  of  all  should  it  be  objected  to  by  those 
who  attribute  slight  sanctity  to  places,  and  think  that 
the  true  idea  of  the  Church  is  realized,  when  two  or 
three  are  gathered  together  in  the  name  of  Christ.  Not 
as  a  holy  spell  which  purifies  the  half  unconscious  spirit, 
is  its  use  encouraged  by  the  Church;  but  it  is  recom- 
mended and  provided  as  a  divine  moral  institution, 
which  brings  vividly  before  the  soul  that  great  truth  of 
Redemption  by  the  blood  of  the  Saviour,  which  is  most 
needed  in  a  dying  hour.  '^ 

"The  question  has  been  discussed  whether  this  form  is_obliga- 
tory  on  the  minister  in  all  cases  of  sickness.  The  English  canon 
(Ixvii.,)  leaves  its  use  discretionary  with  the  minister,  "  as /(«  s/tn// 
think  most  needful  and  convenient ;'"  and  the  exhortation  leaves  liim 
"to  use  other  like,"  of  his  own  selection,  if  lie  prefer.  Bishop  Bar- 
rington  observed  that,  in  many  cases,  the  funeral  service  might  be 
used  with  almost  as  much  propriety  as  the  office  for  the  sick." — 
{Charge  1797,;).  31.)  Bi.^hop  Horsely  gives  the  same  judgment  on 
the  exclusive  use  of  the  service." — Keij  to  Ike  Dock  of  Com.  Pnnjer, 
■p.  273. 

'■■' In  Dr.  Miller's  "  Presbyterianism"  after  a  very  strong  state- 
ment of  objections  to  the  administration  of  the  communion  in 
private,  and  an  exaggerated  account  of  the  ordinary  practice  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  the  folhjwing  admission  is  made: 

"  It  was  remarked  that    Pre.'jbyterians  take  this  ground  and  act 


BURIAL    OF    THE    DEAD,  335 

A  suitable  Collect,  Epistle,  and  Gospel  are  provided. 
The  service  is  the  same  as  that  used  in  the  public  Com- 
munion of  the  Church.  One  of  the  rubrics  is  very 
valuable  from  the  decisive  testimony  which  it  furnishes 
to  the  fact  that,  in  the  view  of  the  Church,  Christ  is 
present,  not  in  the  elements,  but  by  his  spirit,  in  the 
heart  of  the  believing  recipient.  '^ 

The  burial  of  the  Dead. 

It  is  no  doubt  the  first  dictate  of  bereaved  love  in  its 
agony  to  utter  a  prayer  for  the  departed.      It  is  the  first 

upon  these  principles  in  all  ordinary  cases.  It  has  sometimes  hap- 
pened, however,  that  a  devout  and  exemplary  communicant  of  our 
Church,  after  long  enjoying  the  privileges  of  the  sanctuary,  has 
been  confined  for  several,  perhaps  for  many  years,  to  a  bed  of 
sickness,  and  been,  of  course,  wholly  unable  to  enjoy  a  Communion 
season  in  the  ordinary  form.  In  such  cases  Presbyterian  ministers 
have  sometimes  taken  the  elders  of  the  Church  with  them,  and  also 
invited  a  half  a  dozen  other  friends  of  the  sick  person — thus  making 
in  reality,  a  church  meeting  by  its  representatives,  and  administered 
the  Communion  in  the  sick  chamber.  To  this  no  solid  objections 
is  perceived."  Now,  if  the  thing  be  wrong  in  principle, — wrong  in 
itself, — as  Dr.  Miller  labors  to  show,  p.  ISa-M,  then  it  cannot  be 
made  right  by  the  number  of  years  during  which  a  communicant 
may  have  been  sick,  and  the  number  of  persons  and  eiders  whom 
the  minister  may  take  to  the  sick  man's  room.  If  not  wrong  in 
jtself,  and  if  lawful  and  proper,  because  a  comfort  and  a  means  of 
grace  to  the  recijiient,  then  it  is  difficult  to  know  by  what  rule  of 
justice  or  of  mercy  the  sick  man  should  suffer  the  deprivation  "  for 
many  years"  before  lie  can  be  permitted  to  enjoy  the  blessed  privi- 
lege. If  no  "  solid  oiijection  can  be  made  to  this,"  how  nuich 
more  solid  is  the  objection  to  the  sick  sufferer's  enjoyment  of  this 
privilege  at  the  end  of  one  year  or  six  months  of  sickness? 
'^  The  rubric  is  quoted  on  p.  174. 


336  BURIAL   or    THE    DEAD. 

cry  crushed  out  of  the  heart,  by  the  fall  upon  it  of  a  heavy 
sorrow.  The  naturalness  of  this  first  passionate  prayer 
of  grief  for  the  dead,  has  been  urged  as  a  proof  of  its 
probable  lawfulness.  Yet  it  is  evidently  not  the  dictate 
of  the  sanctified  part  of  our  nature,  which  acquiesces 
in  the  will  of  God,  and  acknowledges  that  he  does  all 
things  well.  It  is  the  outburst  of  natural  affection.  It 
is  checked  as  soon  as  right  religious  sentiment  assumes 
ascendancy.  The  prayer  is  stopped  mid-way  if  the 
agitated  soul  hear  the  voice  from  heaven,  ''Be  still,  and 
know  that  I  am  God  !" 

The  first  book  of  Edward  contained  a  prayer  for  the 
dead,  which  has  been  omitted  in  every  subsequent  re- 
vision. 

'^  The  rubric  forbids  the  office  to  be  used  for  unbap- 

'■'  It  has  been  made  a  question  in  England  whether  this  office  may 
be  used  over  such  as  have  been  baptized  by  dissenters  or  sectaries, 
who  have  no  regular  commission  for  administering  the  Sacraments. 
Mr.  Wheatley  seems  to  think  that  the  clergyman  is  not  obliged  to 
recognise  any  Baptisms  but  such  as  are  proved  by  the  parish  regis- 
ters. But  by  this  rule  he  would  exclude  the  children  of  Roman 
Catholics,  the  validity  of  whose  Baptisms  he  would  not  be  disposed 
to  dispute.  One  of  the  highest  tribunals  in  England  has,  however, 
within  a  few  years  past,  decided  in  favor  of  the  legality  of  the  Bap- 
tism of  dissenters  upon  the  principles  of  ecclesiastical  law.  And 
Mr.  Shepherd  well  observes,  that  nothing  more  is  necessary  for  the 
settlement  of  this  point  than  the  pains  and  penalties  to  which  the 
Presbyterians  were  subjected,  which  are  so  many  demonstrations 
that  the  Church  holds  them  tn  be  Christians,  and  admits,  of  course, 
the  validity  of  their  Baptism.  To  excommunicate  him  who  has  no 
right  to  Church  Communion  would  be  an  absurdity;  and  he  has  no 
right  to  Communion  who  is  not  legally  baptized.  \ 

Bishop  Brownell,  Commentary  on  P.  Book,  481. 


BtJRIAL   OF   THE   DEAD.  337 

tized  adults,  excommunicated  persons,  and  those  who 
have  committed  suicide.  From  the  earliest  ages  it  has 
been  held  the  crowning  infamy  and  the  last  woe  of  man, 
that  his  body  should  be  denied  the  usual  rites  of  religious 
sepulture.  The  prohibition  of  the  rubric  is  not  intended 
as  a  punishment  of  the  dead ''' — for  as  such  it  would  be 
impotent — but  as  a  warning  and  restraint  to  the  living. 
It  might  operate  as  a  powerful  check  upon  the  mind  of  one 
who  meditated  suicide,  or  was  about  to  brave  excommuni- 
cation, to  know  that  his  body  would  be  deposited^  dis- 
honored, in  unconsecrated  ground.  It  would  be  a  strong 
appeal  to  his  sensibility  to  remember  that  his  remains 
would  not  be  deposited  in  the  earth,  with  the  usual  tok- 
ens of  respect  and  affection  for  the  dead;  that  he  would 
not  be  accompanied  to  his  last  resting  place  by  a  troop  of 
mourning  friends,  and  placed  in  his  narrow  house  with 
words  of  prayer;  but  that  in  silence,  and  by  stealth,  he 
would  be  borne,  as  a  guilty  thing,  to  a  dishonored  grave. 

The  propriety  of  the  rubric,  in  the  case  of  suicide, 
can  hardly  be  brought  in  question.  It  can  well  be  vin- 
dicated on  the  ground  of  propriety,  if  on  no  other. 
"  Decorum  and  good  sense  will  declare  in  favor  of  the 
present  practice  of  a  decent  sepulture,  without  any  but 
the  most  necessary  attendance." 

The  other  two  cases  in  which  the  clergyman  is  forbid- 
den to  use  the  office  for  the  Burial  of  the  Dead,  are  not 
so  obviously  proper.     One  objection  to  their  remaining 

15  '<  Far  be  the  thought  of  wishing  to  extend  to  this  country  those 
severe  laws  which,  in  other  countries,  revenge  on  the  poor  tenement 
of  clay  the  last  misdeed  of  its  poor  deluded  inhabitant." 

Bishop  WMte,  on  the  Offices,  p.  237. 
15 


338  BURIAL   OF   THE   DEAD. 

in  the  Prayer  Book  is  that  they  are  practically  a  dead 
letter.  We  sustain  the  obloquy  of  having,  without  the 
benefit,  if  any  there  might  be,  of  V/sing  them.  To  the 
writer  they  seem  to  be  the  relics  of  a  darker  day  which  we 
should  do  \yell  to  omit.  The  penalty  of  excommunica- 
tion, in  this  country,  consisting,  as  it  does,  merely  of  ex- 
pulsion from  the  communion,  has  but  small  terrors  for  the 
offender.  He  who  is  excommunicated  in  our  church, 
can  be  received,  in  most  cases,  with  double  honor,  in  any 
of  the  numerous  sects  which  throng  the  land.  From  his 
position  of  increased  importance,  where  he  would  wear 
the  honors  of  persecuted  saintship  and  quasi  martyrdom, 
he  would  laugh  at  the  faint  thunders  of  a  modern  excom- 
munication. However  important  it  may  be  to  revive 
a  salutary  dread  of  excommunication,  we  conceive  that 
such  a  result  is  nowise  promoted  by  retaining,  in  our 
service,  a  provision  which  can  never  be  applied.  We 
can  never  refuse  to  perform  the  otfice  over  an  excom- 
municated person,  because  we  never  can  have  the 
opportunity  to  refuse.  He  who  has  been  excommuni- 
cated by  our  church,  will  leave  directions — or  his  friends 
will  provide — that  he  be  buried  by  some  minister  of 
another  denomination.  The  rubric  is  perfectly  impotent, 
and  should  be  removed. 

The  prohibition  to  use  the  office  in  the  case  of  an  un- 
baptized  adult  is  liable  to  similar  and  additional  objec- 
tions. Even  this  is  an  advance  on  the  Enghsh  service, 
which  extends  the  prohibition  to  the  case  of  infants  as 
well  as  adults.  The  writer  has  never  known,  person- 
ally, an  instance  in  which  the  performance  of  the  ser- 
vice has  been  declined  on  the  ground  that  the  deceased 
was  unbaptized.     He  has  known  instances  in  which  the 


BURIAL    OF   THE    DEAD.  339 

officiating  clergyman  has  abstained  from  making  inqui- 
ries, when  he  was  in  doubt ;  and  other  instances,  in 
which  he  has  been  informed,  on  good  authority,  that  the 
person  was  not  baptized,  and  has  yet  persisted  in  taking 
it  for  granted  that  he  was  baptized,  unless  notified  in 
some  formal  and  olhcial  manner  that  such  was  not  the 
case.  Surely  a  rubric  which  puts  clergymen  to  such 
doubtiul  devices  is  more  honored  in  the  breach  than  in 
the  observance.  It  is,  and  ought  to  be,  obsolete,  and 
therefore  it  were  better  to  treat  it  as  obsolete,  than  to 
evade,  it  by  a  trick  played  upon  the  conscience. 

The  ground  on  which  these  two  rubrics  are  vindicated 
is,  that  they  are  constructed  on  the  supposition  that  the 
departed  was  a  member  of  the  Church  ;  and  that  as  the 
unbaptized  and  excommunicated  are  not  members  of  the 
Church,  the  service  cannot,  in  their  case,  properly  be 
employed.  However  that  objection  may  apply  to  the 
English  service,  it  is  not  applicable  to  our  own.  The 
improvement  made  by  the  American  Church,  in  this 
department,  has,  it  is  trusted,  left  no  plausible  ground  of 
objection  against  the  service.  "  In  particular  it  is  so 
divested  of  oil  reference  to  the  state  of  the  deceased  per- 
son, that  no  scandal  of  his  life  need  occasion  scruple  in 
the  minister  or  disgust  in  the  attendants  of  the  fami- 
ly.'"" Our  service,  as  thus  improved,  is  designed  for 
the  benefit  of  the  living,  and  has  no  reference  to  the 
past  or  present  condition  of  the  dead."'^     To  omit  it, 


'«  Bishop  White  on  the  Offices,  p.  237. 

"  The  English  service  has  been  much  censured  for  those  portions 
which  seem  to  consider  the  departed  as  certainly  in  a  state  of  feli- 
city.   In  the  first  of  the  two  concluding  Collects  thia  language  oc- 


340  BURIAL    OF   THE    DEAD. 

therefore,  in  the  case  of  the  unbaptized,  would  be  to 
deprive  the  living  of  the  benefit  of  most  salutary  and 
impressive  truth,  at  a  moment  when  their  hearts 
would  be  most  fitted  for  its  reception. 

No  one  of  our  otfices  is  more  admired  for  its  grandeur 
and  beauty  than  the  burial  service.  The  well  chosen 
sentences  with  which  it  opens;  the  words  of  the  Psalmist, 
which  so  touchingly  pourtray  our  mortality  and  weak- 
ness ;  the  wonderful  chapter  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Corin- 
thians, in  which  the  finest  logic  and  the  most  rapturous 
eloquence  are  combined  ;  the  sweet  and  pathetic  lament 
over  man's  fading  glory,  and  the  impassioned  prayer 
for  mercy  in  our  hour  of  death,  which  are  uttered  as  the 
body  pauses  at  the  margin  of  the  ojien  grave  ;  the 
solemn  committal  of  "  earth  to  earth,  ashes  to  ashes, 
dust  to  dust ;"  the  voice  from  heaven  (Rev.  xiv,  13) 
announcing  blessedness  to  all  who  die  in  the  Lord;  the 
concluding  prayers  that  all  present  may  rest  and  rise 
with  the  righteous — all  these,  combined,  constitute  a 
service,  it  is  believed,  altogether  unequalled  for  majesty, 
solemnity,  and  propriety. 

This  service,  then,  interpreted  by  its  history,  teaches 
that  the  dead  receive  no  benefit  from,  and  are  not  to  be 
made  the   subject   of,    human   prayer ;   and   gives   no 

curs — "  We  give  thee  hearty  thanks  that  it  hath  pleased  thee  to  deliver 
this  our  brother  out  of  the  miseries  of  this  sinful  world  ;  beseeching  thee, 
that  it  may  please  thee  of  thy  gracious  goodness  shortly  to  accomplish  the 
number  of  thine  elect  and  to  hasten  thy  kingdom.'"  In  the  second'  the 
Father  is  invoked  "  to  raise  us  from  tlie  death  of  sin  to  the  Hfe  o^ 
righteousness,  that  when  we  shall  depart  this  life  we  may  rest  in 
him,  as  our  hope  is  this  our  brother  doth."  These  objectionable  ex- 
pressions are  both  omitted  in  our  book. 


FORMS    OF    PRAYER.  341 

countenance  to  the  doctrine  charged  upon  the  English 
office  that  all  the  baptized  are  certainly  enrolled  among 
the  saved. 

The  Churching  of  Women. 

In  the  place  of  this  "  Thanksgiving  after  Childbirth," 
the  form  of  thanksgiving  for  recovery  from  sickness, 
among  the  occasional  thanksgivings,  is  generally  used 
in  this  country.  It  is  one  of  the  original  services  of  the 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  was  first  called  "the 
Order  of  Purification  of  Women. "  Although  the  origin 
of  the  usage  is  undoubtedly  Jewish,  there  is  nothing 
superstitious  or  of  doubtful  propriety  in  the  service. 
Yet  it  is  believed  to  be  with  well-nigh  universal  appro- 
bation that  the  service  has  been  suffered  to  fall  into 
disuse. 

Forms  of  Prayer  to  be  used  at  sea. 

"  The  forms  of  prayer  to  be  used  at  sea  were  first  in- 
serted in  the  English  book  at  the  last  review.  They 
have  been  adopted  in  ours,  with  only  a  few  verbal  altera- 
tions, occasioned  chiefly  by  a  difference  of  political  insti- 
tutions. It  will  be  observed  that  with  the  exception  of 
the  first  two  collects  they  are  all  occasional  services — 
the  common  morning  and  evening  s^ervice  being  ap- 
pointed to  be  used  at  sea.'"" 

The  writer  confesses  great  repugnance  to  see  a 
"prayer  to  be  said  before  a  fight  at  sea  against  an  ene- 
my," embodied  in  our  formulary  of  prayer.  He  would 
much  prefer  to  see  a  prayer  incorporated  into  the  daily 
service  that  God  would  restrain  rulers  and  nations  from 

•**  Bishop  Brownell  on  the  Prayer  Book. 


342  VISITATION    OF    PRISONERS. 

the  unspeakable  madness,  and  the  enormous  guilt  of 
war.  Believing  that  war  is  a  gigantic  crime,  and  that 
the  cases  in  which  it  is  lawful  to  resort  to  it  are  so  ex- 
tremely unlikely  to  occur,  that  it  may  be  considered 
practically  unlawful  to  resort  to  it  at  all,  the  writer  feels 
that  the  church  would  do  better  to  pray  constantly  that 
it  may  be  averted,  than  to  retain  even  one  supplication 
for  victory,  standing  in  the  midst  of  humble  prayers 
and  adoring  praises  to  the  God  of  peace.  The  writer  is 
aware  that  such  sentiments  will  be  regarded  by  many 
of  his  readers  as  extreme;  but  he  is  persuaded  that  the 
day  is  rapidly  approaching,  when  religious  men  will  no 
more  apologize  for  war  than  for  the  slave  trade. '^■ 

Visitation  of  Priscners. 

The  English  Liturgy  contains  no  forms  for  the  vis^ita- 
tion  of  prisoners.  Ours  was  taken  from  the  Irish  Book 
of  Common  Prayer;  in  which  it  is  set  forth  as  "  treated 
upon  by  the  Archbishops  and  Bishops,  and  the  rest  of 
the  clergy  of  Ireland,  and  agreed  upon  by  his  Majesty's 
license  in  their  synod,  hoiden  at  Dublin,  in  the  year 
1771." 

It  is  a  beautiful  service,,  in  which  the  mercy  of  God, 

'^The  following  rubric  is  at  the  end  of  this  service  : 
Jit  the  burial  of  the  dead  at  sea,  the  office  in  the  Common  Prayer 
Book  may  be  used ;  on lij  instead  of  these  words,  "  fFe  therefore  commit 
his  body  to  the  ground,  earth  to  earth,''''  Sfc.,  say  these  words :  "We 
therefore  commit  his  body  to  the  deep,  to  be  turned  into  corruption, 
looking  for  the  resurrection  of  tlie  l)ody,  when  the  sea  shall  give  up 
her  dead,  and  the  Hfe  of  the  world  to  come,  through  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ;  who  at  his  coming  shall  change  our  vile  body,  that  it  may 
be  like  his  glorious  body,  according  to  the  mighty  working  whereby 
he  is  able  to  subdue  all  things  unto  himself." 


FORMS    OF    PRAYER.  343 

througli  Christ,  to  the  most  sinful,  if  they  believe  and 
repent,  is  afFectionately  and  earnestly  displayed.  The 
w  hole  service  is  an  illustration  of  the  remark  of  Hannah 
More,  that  there  is  one  instance  of  repentance  in  death 
in  the  Bible,  (that  of  a  condemned  criminal,)  that 
no  one  may  despair;  and  but  one,  that  no  one  may  pre- 
sume. 

The  same  one  ground  of  hope,  Christ  Jesus;  the 
same  exercises  of  heart,  true  repentance  and  appropri- 
ating faith;  the  same  duties  of  confession,  restitution, 
and  charity  for  all  men,  are  here  enjoined,  as  in  the 
service  for  the  visitation  of  the  sick. 

"A  FORM  OF  Prayer  and  Thanksgiving." 

This  form  of  prayer  and  thanksgiving  for  the  fruits  of 
the  earth,  and  other  blessings  of  His  merciful  provi- 
dence, has  no  example  in  the  English  Liturgy,  It  was 
prepared  in  1785,  and  printed  in  the  proposed  book. 

Forms  of  Prayer  to  be  used  in  Families. 

There  are  no  such  prayers  in  the  Liturgy  of  the 
mother  Church.  Those  in  our  Prayer-Book  are  taken 
from  Bishop  Gibson.  It  need  hardly  be  remarked  that 
their  use  is  not  obligatory. 

The  Convocation,  which  Avas  broken  up  in  the  reign  of 
William  and  Mary,  had  under  consideration  a  book  of 
family  prayer.  "  There  was  provided  a  family  book,  to 
be  authorized  by  this  Convocation.  It  contained  direc- 
tions for  family  devotions,  with  several  forms  of  prayer, 
for  worship  every  morning  and  evening,  suited  to  the 
different  circumstances  of  the  families,  to  be  used."  ^ 

»"Life  of  Dr.  Prideaux,  p.  61. 


XV. 

^rticUe  of  Hcltgton. 


The  use  and  position  of  the  thirty-nine  Articles  of 
Religion,  are  topics  which  have  been  of  late  elaborately 
discussed. 

The  candidate  for  Baptism  is  admitted  to  the  Church 
upon  a  confession  of  belief  in  the  Apostles'  Creed.  The 
candidate  for  Orders  is  properly  required  to  subscribe  to 
a  more  minute  confession  of  faith.  A  solemn  written 
engagement  is  entered  into,  previous  to  ordination,  by 
every  clergyman  of  the  Chuich,  in  which  he  promises 
"  to  conform  to  the  doctrines  and  worship  of  the  Pro- 
testant Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States."  To 
understand  to  what  extent  the  Articles  of  the  Church 
embody  its  doctrines,  and  in  what  sense  the  promise  to 
conform  to  them  is  to  be  understood,  we  must  trace 
their  history. 

HiSTOBY    OF    THE    ARTICLES. 

We  have  already  given  a  sketch  of  the  formularies  of 
faith  set  forth  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.'  They  bear 
but  little  resemblance  to  those  established  under  Ed- 

•  Page  25. 


HISTORY   OF   THE    ARTICLES.  345 

ward,  and  retained  in  the  Church  of  England,  with 
slight  variations,  at  the  present  time.  The  Articles  were 
not  composed  until  about  four  years  after  the  Liturgy 
was  established.  They  were  not  passed  by  the  Convo- 
cation, and  were  not  signed  by  many  of  the  clergy. 
The  death  of  Edward  occurred  very  soon  after  their 
composition  by  Cranmer.  They  were,  however,  pub- 
lished and  enjoined  by  the  king's  authority.  None 
were  to  be  admitted  to  degrees  in  the  universities,  or 
admitted  to  benefices,  who  refused  to  subscribe  to  them.'' 
This  deficiency  of  authority  was  not  fully  supplied  until 
1571.  In  1562  they  were  adopted  by  the  Convocation, 
with  some  slight  changes,  but  not  confirmed  by  Pailia- 

'The  first  title  of  the  Articles,  says  Burnet,  (vol.  ii,  p.  276,) 
conveys  the  impression  that  they  were  published  by  the  Synod. 
The  title  is  as  follow.^  ;  "Articles  which  were  agreed  to  in  the  Synod 
of  London,  in  the  year  155:2,  by  the  Bishops  and  other  godly  and 
learned  men,  to  root  out  the  discord  of  opinions,  and  establish  the 
agreement  of  true  religion."  Craniner,  at  his  trial,  declared  his  igno- 
rance that  such  a  tiile  was  to  have  been  prefixed  to  them,  and  his 
disapprobation  of  it  when  it  appeared.  At  the  same  time  he  ac- 
knowledged his  authorship  of  the  Articles.  Philpot,  at  his  trial, 
endeavored  to  vindicate  the  expression,  on  the  ground  that  the  au- 
thority of  the  Synod  could  be  pleaded  for  them,  because  they  were 
constructed  by  those  who  were  appointed  by  the  Synod  for  that 
purpose.  The  plea  was  every  way  inadmissible.  1.  If  the  Synod 
had  appointed  Commissioners  for  that  work,  it  could  not  be  con- 
sidered their  work  until  sanctiotied  by  them.  2.  The  Commissioners 
were  appointed  not  to  form  Articles  of  faith,  but  ecclesiastical  laws, 
the  fruit  of  whicii  was  the  book  "  Reformatio  legum  tccledasticarum.'" 
3.  rhe  Commission  was  limited  to  three  years,  and  the  Articles 
were  composed  after  that  period.  See  Lamb's  History  of  the  Ar- 
ticles, p.  3,  8 ;  Short,  p.  167  ;  Strype's  Cranmer,  388. 
15* 


846  HISTORY  OF  THE  ARTICLES. 

ment.  They  were  again  revised  and  passed,  under  the 
direction  of  Archbishop  Parker,  in  the  Convocatiun  of 
1571,  and  confirmed  by  Parliament.  From  that  period 
they  have  remained  unchanged  in  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land.* 

^  It  would  exceed  our  limits,  and  be  foreign  to  the  object  of  this 
work,  to  enter  minutely  into  a  history  of  these  Articles.  The  fol- 
lowing brief  sketch  of  their  external  history  is  all  that  the  author 
ran  afford. 

The  Articles,  as  drawn  up  in  Edward's  reign,  were  forty-lwo  in 
number.'  In  1562  a  draft  of  thirty-nine  Articles  was  presented  to 
the  Convocation  by  Archbishop  Parker.^  He  omitted  four  Articles 
of  those  of  Edward  VI,  which  formed  the  x,  xvi,  xix,  and  xli,  of 
the  forty-two.  He  introduced  four  new  ones,  v,  xii,xxix,  and  xxx, 
and  altered,  more  or  less, 'seventeen  of  the  others,  ii,  vi,  vii,  ix,  x, 
xi,  xvii,  xxii,  xxiv,  xxv,  xxvii,  xxviii,  xxxii,  xxxiv,  xxxv,  xxxvi, 
xxxvii. 

The  Convocation  which  met  January  11,  1563,  made  several 
alterations  in  the  copy  presented  by  Parker.  They  omitted  xl,  xli, 
and  xlii ;  and  when  they  were  printed  the  xxix  also  was  left  out. 
They  altered  iii,  ix,  xxi,  xxv,  xxviii,  xxxiv,  and  the  title  of  xvi. 
The  Articles  so  changed  were  subscribed  by  the  upper  house  of 
Convocation,,  on  the  29th  of  January,  and  by  the  lower  house  on 
the  5th  of  February.^ 

In  the  act  of  Parliament  of  1571,  it  seems  that  only  those  Articles 
"  which  concern  the  confession  of  the  true  Christian  faith,  and  the 
doctrine  of  the  Sacraments," ''  were  enjoined  as  necessary  to  be  sul)- 
scribed,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  Articles  on  tlie  Church,  the  Homilies 
and  the  consecration  of  Bishops  and  Ministers.  The  Articles  which 

1  See  '-Articuli  de  quibus  in  Synodo  Londoniuiisi,  Anno  Dow.  1552,  &c., 
&c.,"  which  are  to  be  found  in  a  volume  of  Liuirgi'^al  Tracts,  lately  prinl(?d 
in  London,  and  sold  in  the  principal  theological  bookstores  of  this  country 

2  Stephens  on  the  British  Constitution.  Strype's  Parfter.  Lainh  on  the 
Articles. 

3  Stephens  on  the  English  Constitution,  vol.  i,  pp.  296-'7. 

4  Hallani's  Constitutional  History,  p.  117 


HISTORY    OF    THE    ARTICLES.  347 

These  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  with  such 
sHght  alterations  as  the  separation  of  this  country  from 

are  excluded  from  subscription  are  i)ot  enumerated  in  the  statute, 
but  are  designated  by  Stephens'  to  be  the  xix,  xx,  xxxv,  and  xxxvi. 
The  designatioi  strikes  us  as  arbitrary.  The  xxiii  Article,  which 
has  reference  to  church  disciplins,  i.«!  as  much  excluded  by  the  lan- 
guage of  the  statute  as  the  xix  and  xx.  The  language  of  the 
statute  is  as  follows:  It  requires  assent  and  subscription  "  to  all  the 
Articles  of  Religion  which  only  concern  the  confession  of  the  true 
Christian  faith,  and  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments,  comprised  in  a 
bonk  imprinted,  entitled  Articles  whereupon  it  was  agreed  by  the 
Arclil)ishops  and  Bishops  of  both  provinces,  and  the  whole  clergy 
in  the  Convocation,  holden  at  London  in  the  year  1562." 

The  essential  alterations  which  were  thus  effected  in  the  forty-two 
Articles  of  Edward  were  as  follow»  :  ® 

In  the  third  Article  the  explanation  of  Christ's  descent  into  hell 
was  omitted. 

In  the  sixth  Article  the  canonical  and  apocryphal  books  were 
enumerated,  and  lessons  from  the  latter  were  declared  to  be  read  for 
the  instruction  of  the  people,  and  not  for  confirmation  of  the  doc- 
trine. 

About  the  authority  of  the  Church  they  now  declared  that  the 
Church  had  power  to  decree  rites  and  ceremonies,  and  had  autiiority 
in  controversies  of  faith,  in  subortiination  to  scripture. 

In  the  Article  upon  the  Lord's  Supper  it  is  declared,  in  place  of 
the  refutation  of  a  corporal  presence,  that  "the  body  of  Christ  is 
given  and  received  after  a  spiritual  manner,  and  that  the  means  by 
which  it  is  received  is  faith. 

The  clause  in  'he  '20ih  Article,  which  declares  the  Church's  au- 
thority, has  been  the  subject  of  voluminous  dispute.  The  latest  and 
most  elaborate  investigator  of  the  subject  (Dr.  Lamb)  has  reached 
the  conclusion  that  Parker  had  urged  the  adoption  of  the  Article 
on  the  Convocation  without  success,  and  that  it  was  inserted  by 
Elizabeth,  without  the  sanction  of  the  Convocation  and  the  Parlia- 

5 English  Constitution,  vol.  i,  p.  297. 
6  Burnet's  Appendix,  No.  Iv. 


348  STANDARD    OF    DOCTRINE. 

the  British  empire  made  necessary,  were  adopted 
by  the  General  Convention  of  1801.  The  histo- 
ry of  opinions  in  our  Church  on  this  subject,  pre- 
vious to  their  adoption,  is  recorded  by  Bishop  White. ^ 
Bishops  Seabur}',  Madison,  and  Prevoost,  inclined  to 
doubt  the  need  of  Articles.  Others,  among  whom  was 
Bishop  White,  considered  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of 
England,  with  the  exception  of  those  parts  which  the 
separation  from  the  mother  Church  and  country  had 
rendered  inapplicable,  as  still  constituting  the  doctrinal 
standard  of  the  Church,  and  were  favorable  to  the  ex- 
plicit recognition  of  them  by  the  Convention.  Others, 
among  whom  the  Diocese  of  Connecticut  was  conspic- 
uous, regarded  the  Church  as  having  no  Articles.  After 
much  discussion,  and  under  the  persuasion  of  the  im- 
possibility of  agreement  upon  any  new  confession,  the 
Articles,  as  they  now  stand  in  our  Prayer-Book,  were 
adopted. 

Standard  of  Doctrine. 

The  question  has  been  started,  which  is  the  more 
authoritative  in  the  settlement  of  the  doctrines  of  the 

mcnt.  Hallam  adopts  the  same  view  of  tbe  subject,  and  is  very 
positive  that  it  was  never  confirmed  by  tiie  Legislature.  Slinrl 
comes  1.0  the  same  conclusion.  It  is  a  question  of  historical  interest, 
hut  of  no  importance  tons  as  American  Episitopalians.  Indeed,  the 
Article  is  |)erfectly  harmless,  asserting  merely  an  authority  which 
all  (churches  exercise — the  atithority  to  decide  for  itself,  and  its  own 
members.  Articles  of  Religion. 

Bishop  Short  has  brought  together  all  the  facts  that  bear  upon 
this  question.  Like  Hallam  and  Dr.  Lamb,  he  acquits  Laud  of  the 
charge  of  introducuig  it,  and. attributes  its  introduction  to  the  dueen. 
See  History,  p.  170,  171. 

*  Memoirs,  p.  179,  186. 


STANDARD    OF    DOCTRINE.  349 

Cliuich,  the  Liturgy  or  the  Articles  ?  The  question  is 
sometimes  asked  under  the  impression  that  the  two  are 
not  accordant.  If  they  are  not,  it  is  not  because  of  any 
designed  diversity  on  the  part  of  those  by  whom  they 
were  constructed.  They  were  framed  by  the  same 
hands.  It  is  true,  that  the  first  Liturgy  was  composed 
something  like  four  years  previous  to  the  Articles.  But 
the  Articles  were  framed  the  year  succeeding  that  in 
which  the  Liturgy  Avas  amended."  As  they  stood  at 
that  period,  they  were  certainly  intended  to  be  consen- 
tient. 

If,  then,  there  be  any  diversity  of  doctrinal  teaching 
in  the  Liturgy  and  Article.s,  it  must  have  arisen  from 
one  of  two  causes.  It  must  have  been  either  from  in- 
advertence— in  which  case  the  diversity  must  be  of  the 
slightest  and  most  unimportant  kind;  or  it  must  have 
arisen  from  the  fact  that  the  one  subsequently  remained 
unchanged,  while  the  other  was  modified  in  accordance 
with  the  changes  of  theological  opinion. 

Is  there  any  good  ground  for  either  of  these  repre- 
sentations? Certainly  not  for  the  former.  The  clear 
heads  and  practised  pens  of  Cranmer  and  Ridley,  with 
all  the  light  cast  upon  the  subject  by  anxious  friends 
and  subtle  foes,  could  not,  after  three  years'  use  of  the 
Liturgy,  have  allowed  any  thing  of  importance  to  have 
reniiiiiied  in  it,  inconsistent  with  the  well-considered 
li   finitions  of  the  Articles. 

Nor  is  there  good  ground  for  the  latter  representation. 
In  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth  the  Articles  were 
brought  into  their  present  form  by  the  same  persons, 

'  1J33. 


350  STANDARD    OF   DOCTRINE. 

and  under  the  same  influences,  by  which  the  Litufgy 
was  modified.  If  the  mere  point  of  greater  fixedness 
determined  the  claim  for  superiority,  then  the  Articles 
are  to  be  preferred  to  the  Liturgy  ;  for  the  former  have 
received  no  modification  since  1571,  while  the  latter 
was  subjected  to  several  changes  in  the  year  1662.  But 
such  a  mode  of  reasoning  is  inadmissible.  History 
testifies  that  neither  of  them  has  stood  still,  while  the 
other  has  progressed.  We  cannot  make  of  the  one  an 
immovable  tower,  and  of  the  other  a  weather  cock, 
which  surmounts  the  spire.  They  are  both  solid  and 
equal  towers,  standing  before  the  temple.  The  object 
of  one  is  to  make  a  statement  and  furnish  a  standard  of 
doctrine.  The  object  of  the  other  is  to  furnish  a  vehicle 
of  devotion,  based  upon,  and  expressing  in  the  language 
of  prayer  and  praise,  the  great  truths  presented  in  the 
Confession  of  Faith. 

If,  then,  they  are  not  variant  in  their  testimony,  the 
one  cannot  properly  be  appealed  to  against  the  other. 

The  only  question  which  remains,  is  "  which  is  to 
be  referred  to  as  a  standard  of  doctrine?"  Manifestly  the 
Articles.  As  such,  they  were  composed  after  a  formu- 
lary of  prayer  was  furnished.  As  such,  they  have 
always  been  regarded  in  the  Church.  As  such,  they 
have  ever  been  printed  with  the  confessions  of  other 
churches.  As  such,  they  went  forth  by  their  title  to 
the  world.-     As  such,  they  have  always  been  referred 

^  "Articles,  &c.,  to  root  the  discord  of  opinions,  and  establish  the 
agreement  of  true  religion,"  or  as  they  were  at  first  published: 
"Articles  agreed  on  by  the  Bishops  and  other  learned  men  in  the 


STANDARD    OF    DOCTRINE.  351 

to  in  the  controversies  ol'  the  theologians  of  the  Church 
w  itl)  Puritans  and  Romanists,  But  while  they  are,,  and 
are  to  be,  referred  to  as  the  precise  and  well-weighed 
definitions  of  doctrine,  they  are  not  to  be  brought  forth 
in  confutation  of  supposed  erroneous  teaching,  embodied 
in  the  services.  We  cannot  properly  adduce  the  Liturgy 
to  confute  the  Articles,  nor  should  we  distrust  our  forms 
of  devotion,  as  if  they  were  in  conflict  with  our  formula 
of  faith." 

Synod  of  London,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  God,  1552,  for  the  avoid- 
ing of  controversies  in  opinions,  and  for  the  establishment  of  godly 
concord  in  certain  matters  of  religion." 

'  A  reference  to  a  few  facts  will  show  that,  to  get  at  the  doctrine  of 
the  Church,  the  ultimate  appeal  must  be  to  the  Articles. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  the  Liturgy  had  been  in  use  some 
years  when  the  Articles  were  framed.  They  were  framed  for  avoid- 
ing diversity  of  doctrine.  They  were  framed  to  settle  opinion, 
which  continued  variant  in  the  use,  and  notwithstanding  the  use,  of 
the  services.  In  part,  therefore,  they  must  have  been  composed  to 
show  what  sense  the  Liturgy  should  bear — on  what  system  of  theo- 
loi^ical  truth  its  language  should  be  interpreted.  As  errors  sprang 
up,  on  the  right  hand  and  on  the  left,  among  those  who  used  these 
devotional  forms,  the  Articles  were  set  forth  with  reference  to  those 
errors,  and  with  the  intention  of  showing  the  real  doctrine  of  the 
Church  in  her.  services. 

Take,  for  instance,  the  services  for  the  administration  of  the 
Sacraments.  Those  services  set  forth  largely  the  nature,  efTects,  and 
blessings  of  the  Sacraments.  They  were  not  composed  with  a  view 
to  proclaim  in  precise  language  what,  as  a  Church,  we  hold  to  be  true 
on  these  subjects.  They  were  constructed  with  the  purpose  of  pro- 
claiming to  her  children  the  duties  and  privileges  and  blessings  con- 
nected with  the  reception  and  participation  of  these  holy  institu- 
tions. Shall  we  not  learn,  then,  from  these  services  what  is  the 
doctrine  of  the  Church  on  the  Sacraments  ?    Certainly.    They  do 


352  subscription  to 

Subscription  to  the  Articles. 

A  long  contest  has  been  waged  in  the  Church  of 
England,  on  the  question  of  the  sense  in  which  sub- 
scii])tion  to  the  Articles  is  required.  On  the  one  hand, 
it  has  been  contended  that  they  are  Articles  of  peace 
and  compromise,  which  do  not  require  assent  to  their 
specific  statements,  on  the  part  of  all.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  has  been  urged  that  the  subscription  to  these 
Articles  implies  a  cordial  ex  animo  assent  to  the  literal 
and  grammatical  sense  of  all  its  specific  statements. 

The  former  statement  has  well  been  designated  "  a 

set  forth  the  doctrine  of  the  Church.     But  if,  on  the  one  hand  or 

the  other,  the  warm  language  of  a  devotional  contemplation  of  truth 
is  strained  to  an  extreme  dogmatic  statement  of  doctrine,  then  we 
have  a  standard  of  faith,  a  confession,  by  which  the  Church  pro- 
claims to  the  world  and  to  all  the  churches,  precisely  how  much  she 
stands  committed  to ;  precisely  how  far  she  is  willing  to  define ; 
precisely  how  much  she  means,  and  intends  to  inculcate,  in  her 
devotional  services.  The  very  fact  that  her  Articles,  by  some  years, 
followed  her  tservices,  and  that  they  were  composed  because  many 
errors  develojied  themselves,  proves  that  this  is  tiie  true  use  and 
position  of  the  Articles.  Bishop  Burnet  calls  (hem  "  the  sum  of  our 
doctrine,  and  the  confession  of  our  faith."  Bishop  Hall  calls  them 
"a  complete  body  of  divinity."  Bishop  Tomline,  "thecruerion  of 
the  faith  ol'  the  members  of  the  Cliurch  of  England."  Other  writeis 
call  tiiem  "  the  doctrine,"  "  the  articles  on  doctrme,"  "  the  articles 
on  public  doctrine."  And  Bishop  Whitgift  says,  "  tlie  articles, 
liturgy,  and  canons,  are  the  doctrina  cultus  et  disciplina  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church." — Bp.  Meade  on  the  Pastoral  Office,  p.  225. 

As  it  was  at  the  first  formation,  so  it  was  at  the  first  revision  of 
the  Liturgy  under  Elizabeth.  The  reconstruction  of  the  Articles 
followed  the  revision  of  the  services  at  a  distance  of  nine  years. 
They  came  in  a  second  time  to  define  the  doctrine  of  the  Church. 


THE    ARTICLES.  353 

figment  and  a  shuffling  subterfuge  to  conceal  permitted 
discrepance  in  teaching.""  The  Church  of  England 
has  been  most  pains-taking  and  explicit  in  exhibiting 
her  view  of  this  subject. 

The  title  to  the  Articles,  from  the  first,  has  expressed 
their  design  of  ^^  avoiding  diversities  and  establishi/ig 
consent."  The  fifth  canon  declares  those  to  be  ipso 
facto  excommunicated  who  shall  affirm  any  of  the  Arti- 
cles to  be  erroneous.  The  36th  canon  requires  the 
clergy  to  subscribe  willingly,  and  ex  animo,  and  "  to 
acknowledge  all  and  every  Article  to  be  agreeable  to 
the  word  of  (iod."  The  statute  of  13  Elizabeth  requires 
that  every  clergyman,  upon  entering  upon  a  benefice, 
shall  declare  his  ^^  unfeigned  assenV^  to  them.  And 
when  in  King  James's  reign,  the  Articles  were  appealed 
to  by  Calvini:;ts  nnd  Arminians,  in  support  of  their  sys- 
tems, a  royal  declaration  was  put  forth  to  the  effect  that 
the  Articles  were  to  be  taken   "  in  the  literal  and  crram- 

O 

matical  sense. '^  It  is  difficult  to  conceive  that  the  plea 
that  subscription  to  the  Articles  was  a. mere  assent  to 
unmeaning  generalities,  which  postponed  or  avoided  all 
dogmatic  decisions,  and  allowed  Socinianism  and  Ro- 
manism to  shelter  themselves  under  its  covering,  could 
ever  have  been  other  than  a"  dishonest  subterfuge.^ 

The  Episcopal  Church  in  this  country  does  not  re- 
quire a  subscription  to  the  Articles,  in  the  same  manner 

« Bp.  WhiUingham's  Charge  for  1849,  p.  34. 

"  We  need  not  remind  the  reader  of  the  effrontery  with  which 
this  dishonest  pretence  was  put  forth  in  Tract  90,  and  similar  pub- 
lications. 


354  CHARACTER    OF 

as  the  Cliiiich  ot'  England.     The  t'orin  of  subsciiplion  is 
as  follows: 

"  I  do  solemnly  engage  to  conform  to  the  doctrines 
and  worship  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States."  It  is  manifest  from  the  account  which 
we  have  given  of  the  sense  in  which  the  subscription 
was  made  in  the  mother  Church,  and  from  the  history  of 
the  adoption  of  these  Articles  by  our  own  Church,  that  a 
cordial  and  ex  animo  assent  to  the  grammatical  meaning: 
of  the  Articles  was  intended  and  expected,'" 

Character  of  the  Articlss. 

The  idea  of  compromise,  to  which  we  have  alluded, 
had  reference  to  the  state  of  the  subscriber's  mind,  in 
putting  his  hand  to  the  Articles.  It  was  seen  that  a 
conviction  of  their  truth,  and  an  i  x  animo  assent  to 
them,  in  their  literal  and  grammatical  sense,  was  im- 
plied in  a  subscription.  It  was  not  intended,  that  while 
the  subscriber  set  his  hand  to  the  distinct  propositions 
of  the  Articles,  he  might  mean,  in  his  own  mind,  only 
to  abstain  from  denying  them,  either  in  his  preaching 
or  conversation;  or  that  he  might  regard  the  words  to 
which  he  affixed  his  signature,  as  merely  a  prepared 
formula  upon  which  he  might  put  any  sense  which  he 
thought  agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God,  and  into  which 
he  might  subsequently  introduce  new  opinions,  as  if 
they  were  an  elastic  garment  which  would  adjust  itself 
to  a  tight  and  perfect  fit  for  all  shapes  and  sizes  of 
opinion. 

'"  See  Bp.  White's  Memoirs  and  Pastoral  Office.  Bp.  Meade  on 
the  Pastoral  Office,  pp.  223-'33. 


THE    ARTICLES.  355 

A  coinpromise  of  this  kind,  in  the  mind  of  the  suh- 
sniber,  and  not  in  the  Articles  themselves,  was  clearly 
improper.  It  would  have  been  destructive  to  the  ho^ 
nesty,  and  ruinous  to  the  faith,  of  the  clergy.  But 
might  not  the  Articles  themselves  have  been,  and  were 
they  not  in  fact,  a  compromise  between  conflicting  opin- 
ions? And  might  not  a  Church,  with  great  propriety 
and  wisdom,  so  construct  her  formulary  of  faith  as  that 
various  sentiments  on  many  points,  might  be  entertained 
by  those  who  signed  and  assented  to  her  standard? 

We  feel  the  embarrassment  of  answering,  in  the  short 
space  to  which  we  are  restricted,  such  large  and  com- 
prehensive questions  We  can  give  little  more  than 
the  outline  of  a  reply. 

It  is  wise  in  the  Church,  and  in  harmony  with  her 
action  through  previous  ages,  that  she  should  demand  of 
those  admitted  to  her  Communion,  assent  to  those  Ar- 
ticles of  faith  only,  which  are  necessary  to  salvation, 
which  are  contained  in  the  Apostle's  Creed. 

But  there  are  also  doctrines  of  religion,  so  immediate- 
ly connected  with  the  grt-at  facts  set  forth  in  the  Creed, 
so  necessarily  involved  in  the  explanation  of  the  Creed, 
so  essential  to  the  preservation  of  a  right  sense  of  the 
Creed,  so  inevitably  to  be  treated  of  by  those  who  are 
to  preach  the  truths  of  the  Creed,  that  it  becomes  ne- 
cessary that  the  ^Irticles  of  Faith  proclaimed  by  that 
venerable  symbol  should  be  guarded  against  perversion 
by  Articles  of  Religion,  to  which  the  ministry  should 
declare  their  unfeigned  assent. 

The  best  wisdom  of  the  best  men  is  required,  to  de- 
termine to  what  degree  of  minuteness  definitions  of  doc- 


356  CHARACTER    OF 

trine  should  extend,  and  up  to  what  point  absolute  as- 
sent to  those  definitions  should  be  required.  To  define 
too  minutely  is  to  burden  the  conscience,  and  to  tempt 
the  minds  of  the  subscribers  to  self- sophistication  or  de- 
ceit. To  define  too  little,  is  to  peril  fundamental  and 
saving  truth.  One  of  Kfer  sons  will  be  forgiven  for  be- 
lieving that  our  Church  has  hit,  with  singular  accuracy, 
a  just  and  wise  medium.  She  defines  the  Trinity;  an- 
nounces the  word  of  God  to  be  the  sole  rule  of  faith 
and  practice;  declares  the  fall  and  depravity  of  man, 
and  his  need  of  converting  and  renewing  grace;  the 
atonement  of  the  Saviour,  justification  by  faith,  election 
in  Christ  to  eternal  life,  good  works,  and  the  doctrine  of 
the  ministry  and  the  Sacraments. 

One  of  three  courses  may  be  adopted  by  a  Church 
in  reference  to  controverted  doctrine.  She  mayiake  her 
stand,  on  one  or  the  other  side,  and  minutely  define  her 
views,  and  demand  an  unqualified  assent  of  her  minis- 
ters to  all  her  declarations.  Such  has  been,  we  con- 
ceive, the  cours-e  of  our  Church  in  reference  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 

Or,  if  she  deems  the  subject  not  to  be  one  of  sufficient 
practical  moment  to  demand  this  course,  she  may  make 
such  general  statements  as  may  include  both  sides  of 
the  disputed  question,  with  the  view  of  allowing  either 
to  be  held  by  the  ministry  of  her  Communion.  "      We 

^'  A  very  different  idea  from  this  is  advanced  by  Burnet  in  the 
following  singular  sentence:  "The  other  [thing  to  be  inferred]  is 
that  an  article  being  conceived  in  such  general  words  that  it  can 
admit  of  difierent  literal  and  grammatical  senses,  even  when  the  senses 
given  are  plainly  contrary  to  one  another,  yet  both  may  subscribe  the 


THE    ARTICLES.  357 

shall    aim  to  show  that  in  reference  to  some  questions 
our  Church  has  pursued  this  plan. 

One  other  course  is  conceivable.  We  do  not  say  it 
is  practicable.  Indeed,  history  attests  its  impracticability. 
A  Church  may  neither  make  the  general  statement  of 
which  we  have  spoken,  under  which  either  of  two  views 
of  a  controverted  subject  may  be  held;  nor  declare  her- 
self for  the  one  or  the  other  side;  while  she  may  en- 
deavor to  combine  the  two  sets  of  statements  into  a  new 
and  third  definition,  w^hich  shall  be  a  tertium  quid,  den- 
article  with  a  good  conscience  and  without  any  equivocation.'*  The 
words  which  admit,  in  tlieir  hteral  and  grammatical  sense,  meanings 
plainly  contrary  to  each  other,  might  be  very  useful  for  the  Priests 
of  Oracular  Shrines,  and  for  diplomatists,  and  for  such  confessions  aa 
were  purposely  designed  to  assert  nothing.  They  are  not,  however, 
the  materials  suited  to  a  confession  of  faith  whose  honest  [  urpose  is 
to  a-sert  positive  propositions.  The  sense  in  which  the  framers  of 
Mie  Article  intended  it — the  meaning  of  it  in  their  mind — is  the  only 
one  in  which  it  can  be  honestly  subscribed.  This  use  of  equivocal 
terms — an  example  of  which  Burnet  has  given  in  the  word  lull — is 
just  what  the  Reformers  strenuously  endeavored  to  avoid. 

Melancthonhad  a  clear  idea  of  the  only  kind  of  general  propositions 
which  it  was  proper  to  embody  in  a  confession,  and  a  salutary  dread, 
founded  on  experience,  of  ambiguous  expressions.  "  I  could 
wish,  as  I  wrote  in  my  previous  letter,  that  not  only  concerning  this 
question,  but  various  others  also,  a  summary  of  necessary  doctrine 
might  be  put  forth,  divested  of  all  private  prejudice,  by  thedeliberate 
and  recorded  suffrages  of  learned  and  fiious  men,  who  should  be  ap- 
pointed for  that  object,  and  icho  should  leave  no  amhigtiities,  as  an  ap- 
ple of  discord,  to  posterity.  The  Council  of  Trent  passed  its  sophis- 
tical decrees  that  it  might  retain  its  errors  under  the  guise  of  am- 
biguities. Far  from  the  Church  be  such  sophistry  !" 
Epistles  of  Melanclhon,  quoted  in  Lairrence's  Bamplon  Lectures,  p.  223. 


358  CHARACTER    OF 

tical  with  neither,  but  composed  of  both.  '-  We  are 
happy  to  believe  that  this  is  a  kind  of  compromise  never 
attempted  by  our  Church. 

But  of  the  second  mode  of  treating  controverted  sub- 
jects there  is,  we  believe,  one  memorable  instance. 
We  have  already  shown  that  the  doctrinal  system  of 
the  Church  is  not  Calvinism.  ''  While  the  Church  has 
not  committed  herself  to  that  system,  she  has  not  com- 
mitted herself  against  it.  She  has  left  it  an  open  ques- 
tion. She  has  made  such  general  statements  as  can  be 
heartily  assented  to  both  by  those  who  receive,  and 
those  who  reject  that  system.  No  fact  in  the  history  of 
these  Articles  is  capable  of  more  perfect  proof  than  this. 
No  fact  more  exemplifies  the  wisdom  and  moderation 
of  the  Reformers.  Whilst  they,  for  the  most  part,  per- 
sonally adopted  the  Calvinistic  system,  '^  they  yet 
abstained,  with  singular  moderation,  from  embodying  it 
in  a  formulary  of  faith,  which  was  intended  for  a  na- 
tion. We  call  it  "  singular  moderation,"  because  it 
has  been  a  characteristic  of  most  of  the  advocates  of 
that  system  to  consider  its  distinctive  principles  as  the 
most  vitalizing,  important,  and  sanctifying  doctrines  of 
the  Gospel. 

Bishop  White,  ''  than  whom  few  persons  have  given 

"  A  metnorable  instance  of  the  failure  to  accomplish  this  object, 
is  furnished  by  the  unsuccessful  efforts  of  the  subtle  Bucer,  to  make 
such  a  statement  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist,  as  should  be  ac- 
ceptable alike  to  the  Lutherans  and  Zwinglians. 

'3Pages53,  58. 

'''See  Good's  book  on  Baptismal  Regeneration,  in  which  this 
point  is  amply  proved. 

'■''  Ordination  offices,  p.  78,  79. 


THE    ARTICLES.  359 

more  thorough  thought  to  this  subject,  thus  states  the 
result  of  his  mature  consideration  of  the  question: 

"  There  ir>  another  question  meeting  us,  and  occasion- 
ing considerable  diversity  of  sentiment.  It  is,  whether, 
according  to  a  distinction  of  names  originating  since  the 
framing  of  the  Articles,  they  are  Calvinistic  or  Armi- 
nian.  The  opinion  here  entertained  is,  that  they  are 
neither;  but  that  there  are  discernible  in  them  these  three 
things:  that  on  the  first  branch  of  the  controversy, 
(predestination,)  they  are  silent  upon  the  point  dis- 
criminating between  the  Calvinists  and  the  Arminians  ; 
that  on  other  points  they  fall  short  of  the  Calvinistic 
tlieory;  and  that  on  others  they  are  opposed  to  it. 

"  When  it  is  said  that,  on  the  first  branch  of  the  con- 
troversy, the  Articles  embrace  both  Calvinists  and 
Arminians,  the  meaning  is,  that  there  is  no  decision  on 
the  question — Whether  predestination  be  or  be  not  found- 
ed on  prescience  ?  And  yet  this  is  a  question  which 
must  have  been  before  the  compilers,  as  it  had  been 
resolved  in  the  affirmative,  by  the  fathers  both  of  the 
Greek  Church  and  of  the  Latin,  before  the  days  of  St. 
Augustin;  and  continued  to  be  so  in  the  former  Church, 
even  after  the  great  ascendency  of  this  father  had  efTect- 
ed  the  negative  of  the  question  in  the  latter  Church. 

"  The  points  on  which  the  Articles  are  here  thought 
to  fall  short  of  Calvinism  are,  the  imputation  of  the 
righteousness  of  Christ;  the  imputation  of  the  sin  of 
Adam;  such  a  corruption  of  human  nature  as  to  impel 
lo  every  species  of  crime,  except  so  far  as  those  are 
restraints  indifTerent  to  moral  good  and  evil:  and,  finally, 
irresistible  grace.  Not  one  of  these  things  is  declared 
in  the  Articles." 


360  CHARACTER    OP 

Substantially  the  same  conclusion  is  reached  in  the 
following  discriminating  remarks  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Spar- 
row .  "* 

"  To  this  course  we  feel  encouraged  by  the  manner  in 
which  these  subjects  are  treated  in  our  standards;  for 
though  the  English  reformers  had  their  private  opinions 
on  these  deep  subjects,  and  candor  constrains  us  to  ad- 
mit that  they  leaned  most  to  that  system  which  is  least 
in  favor  amongst  us,  yet  I  think  it  equally  certain  that 
they  were  not  disposed  to  be  dogmatical  on  these  points. 
Tliough  brought  up  in  the  system  referred  to,  they  were 
manifestly  pressed  with  its  difficulties.  They  accord- 
ingly did  not  venture  to  make  out  a  perfect  system. 
They  moreover  admitted  into  the  public  documents  of  the 
Church,  expressions,  some  of  which  tally  best  with  one 
system,  and  others  with  another.  They  had,  too,  we 
know  as  a  matter  of  history,  various  shades  of  opinion 
among  themselves.  Add  to  all  this,  that  they  did  their 
work  as  Reformers  of  the  Church  through  a  long  course 
of  years,  at  different  intervals  and  under  diverse  exter- 
nal influences,  and  that  they  had  come  out  from  a  state 
of  darkness  and  of  chaos,  by  no  means  calculated  to 
prepare  their  minds  in  all  respects  for  the  judicious  set- 
tlement of  hard  questions.  In  such  circumstances,  the 
utmost  we  could  expect  is  what  we  actually  do  find,  great 
decision  and  clearness  on  things  fundamental,  and  great 
caution,  with  perhaps  some  want  of  consistency,  on 
matters  lying  further  in  the  region  of  speculation  and 
metaphysics.     Over  and  above  all  this,  when  we  reflect 

'^The  right  conduct  of  Theological  Seminaries,  pp.  19, 20." 


THE    ARTICLES.  361 

that  from  the  Reformation  down  to  the  present  day, 
there  have  lived  and  taught  in  the  Church  of  England 
men  who  have  held  to  Calvinism,  Baxterianism,  Ar- 
minianism.  Nationalism,  and  Ecclesiasticalism,  filling 
every  station,  from  the  throne  in  Canterbury  to  the 
humblest  curacy;  we  are  constrained  to  believe  our- 
selves bound  to  the  utmost  toleration  on  the  profounder 
points  of  theolog)-,  and  to  a  free  allowance  of  the  rights 
of  these  several  schools  to  the  privileges  of  our  Com- 
munion, and  the  work  of  our  Ministry;  ^romt/e</,  always, 
that  on  the  plain,  practical,  and  vital  points,  they  fail 
not  to  speak  as  do  the  Bible  and  the  Prayer-Book.  The 
less  exacting  we  would  be  on  the  deep  questions  re- 
ferred to,  the  more  rigid  would  we  feel  bound  to  be  on 
the  doctrines  of  man's  guilt  and  depravity,  his  justifica- 
tion through  faith  only,  his  regeneration  and  sanctifi- 
cation  by  the  Holy  Ghost;  lest  a  latitudinarianism,  at 
once  unscriptural  and  unphilosophical,  creep  in,  on  doc- 
trinal subjects;  and  the  mere  externals  of  the  Church 
come  to  be  considered  its  essence,  and  the  people  be 
left  to  feed  on  the  husks,  when  they  ought  to  be  sup- 
plied with  children's  bread." 

It  is  evident,  then,  that  the  Articles  express  definite 
propositions,  which  are  to  be  subscribed,  in  their  literal 
and  grammatical  sense,  with  an  ex  animo  conviction  of 
their  truth.  Wliat  is  the  literal  sense  of  the  Articles, 
is  to  be  ascertained,  by  referring  to  the  meaning  of  their 
language  at  the  time  they  were  formed,  as  that  mean- 
ing was  held  in  the  minds  of  those  by  whom  they  were 
composed.  This  is  the  principle  upon  which  all  the 
16 


36^  ARTICLES   RELATIVE   TO 

services  of  the  Church  have  been  interpreted  in  these 
pages. '" 

It  should  be  observed,  however,  that  although  the 
Church  properly  demands  a  distinct  assent  to  certain 
prominent  truths,  she  does  not  claim  an  infallible  ex- 
emption from  error.  Neither  does  subscription  to  the 
main  truth  contained  in  an  Article,  and  which  it  was 
the  great  purpose  of  that  Article  to  express,  imply  an 
absolute  conviction  of  the  truth  of  every  minor  proposi- 
tion not  necessarily  involved  in  the  greater  one.  The 
purpose  of  the  Church  is  to  clothe  her  children  in  ar- 
mor; not  to  confine  them  in  fetters. '® 

Nor  is  the  Church  so  ignorant  of  the  imperfection  of 
language  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  the  human  mind  on  the 
other,  as  to  suppose  that,  even  when  the  same  precise 
and  dogmatic  definitions  receive  the  hearty  assent  of 
the  subscribers,  they  will  wear  precisely  the  same  as- 
pect in  every  mind,  and  produce  the  same  practical  and 
theoretical  results.     The  standards  of  faith  are  the  solid 


"  "There  is  a  sense,  fixed  in  proportion  as  it  is  carefully,  full  in 
proportion  as  it  is  successfully,  ascertained — the  sense  of  the  compiler 
or  composer,  the  original  historical  sense,  that  which  was  in  the  mind 
of  those  who  first  mad€  and  used  the  formularies,  and  which  they 
meant  they  should  always  have."" 

'*To  avoid  the  absurdity  of  making  those  formularies  a  miserable 
nose  of  wax,  their  lang^iage  must  be  received  in  a  stationary  sense, 
and  no  where  can  that  sense  be  found  except  in  the  mind  and  mean- 
ing of  the  original  employers." 

Bishop  Whityingham's  Charge  for  1849,  pp.  30,  32. 

'*  Bishop  White's  »Ve»i(wrs,  p.  185. 


THK    RULE    OF    FAITH.  363 

and  rocky  shores  which  reniahi  Immoveable;  while  the 
minds  of  men  are  the  waters,  flowing  by,  in  which  they 
are  reflected;  and  as  each  wave  passes  it  retains  an 
image,  more  or  less  distinct,  of  the  unchanging  shore, 
in  proportion  as  it  is  clear  and  calm. 

Articles  on  the  Holy  Trinity. 

The  Articles  which  have  reference  to  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost,  are  the  first  five.  The  fifth  Article,  '<of 
the  Holy  Gliost,"  was  added  at  the  revision  under  Eliza- 
beth. At  the  same  time  an  additional  clause,  after  the 
word  "  Son,"  was  insertcil  in  the  second  Article.  '^  The 
third  Article  contained  a  reference  to  1  Peter,  iii,  19-20, 
as  a  proof  of  the  descent  of  Christ  into  hell,  which  was 
subsequently  withdrawn.  In  all  other  respects,  the  Arti- 
cles were  originally  in  the  same  form  as  at  the  present 
time.  Upon  the  statements  contained  in  these  Articles, 
so  consonant  to  Scripture,  and  so  accordant  with  the 
faith  of  the  Catholic  Church  in  all  ages,  we  need  not 
dwell. 

Articles  relative  to  the  Rule  of  Faith. 

The  sixth  Article  "  on  the  SulTicieney  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures  for  salvation,"  was  changed  from  its  original 


"* "  The  Son,  "  which  is  the  word  of  the  Father,  begotten  from 
everlasting  of  the  Father,  the  very  and  eternal  God,  of  one  sub- 
stance with  the  Father,'  took  man's  nature,"  &c.  The  clause  is  an 
emphatic  testimony  to  the  supreme  and  co-equal  divinity  of  the  Son. 

The  first  and  second  Articles  are  manifestly  taken  from  the  Augs- 
burgh  confession.  (/Orpii.s  confessionum,  pp.  7,  8.  The  first  is 
almost  entirely  identical  in  words  with  a  part  of  the  1st  Article  of 
Augsburgh 


364  ARTICLES    RELATING    TO 

form  by  an  omission  and  an  addition.  The  words,  in  the 
first  draught,  which  declared  that  what  was  not  read  in 
Scripture  and  could  not  be  proved  thereby,  "  may 
sometimes  be  admitted  by  God's  faithful  people  as  pious 
and  conducing  unto  order  and  decency,"  is  the  portion 
which  was  omitted.  That  portion  of  the  Article  whicli 
defines  the  canonical  books  is  that  which  was  added. 

In  this,  as  in  most  of  the  Articles,  reference  was  had 
to  the  errors  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  which  held  to  the 
equal  authority  of  oral  traditions  and  to  an  infallible  au- 
thority in  the  Church,  by  which  alone  the  Scriptures 
could  be  rightly  interpreted  and  understood.  Our 
Church  took  her  stand  here  with  all  the  Churches  of  the 
Reformation,  in  enthroning  the  Word  of  God  as  the  su- 
preme arbiter  of  truth,  the  one  only  rule  of  faith  and 
practice.  "" 

The  seventh  Article  declares  the  haimony  of  the  Old 
Testament  with  the  New;  the  pioffer  of  life  to  the  old 
Fathers  in  the  name  of  Christ  alone;  and, the  perpetual 
obligation  of  the  moral  law  in  the  Old  Testament,  with 
an  exemption  from  its  rites  and  civil  precepts. 

The  eighth  Article,  in  the  English  Church,  announces 

^"Gallicana  confessio,  (in  corpus  et  syntagma  confessionum,)  Ar- 
ticle V,  p.  100. 

Scoticana  confessio,  Art.  xix,  p.  151. 

Belgica  confessio,  Art.  vii,  p.  165. 

Helvitica  confessio,  Art.  i  and  ii,  pp.  15,  18. 

The  same  testimony  i.s  given  by  tiie  Polish,  Argentine,  Saxon, 
Wirtemberg,  Bohemian,  and  Augshnrgh  confessions.  See  the  index 
to  the  "Corpus,"  &c. ,  Harmonia  sive  concordantia  confessionum 
fidei  per  Articulos  digesta. 


CHRISTIANS    AS    INDIVIDUALS.  365 

that  three  Creeds,  the  Apostle's,  Nicene,  and  Anthan- 
asian  Creeds,  ought  thoroughly  to  be  received  and  be- 
lieved, because  they  may  be  proved  by  most  certain 
warrants  from  Scripture.  In  our  Church  the  Anthana- 
sian  Creed  is  omitted  in  the  enumeration.*' 

Articles  relating  to   Christians  as  individuals. 

The  doctrine  developed  in  the  following  Articles, 
from  the  ninth  to  the  nineteenth,  is  of  the  most  vital 
importance.  To  understand  their  meaning,  we  must 
learn  their  source.  That  they  are  derived  in  large 
measure  from  the  Augsburgh  confession  ;  that  they 
contemplated  the  same  errors  of  the  Romish  Church, 
against  which  those  Articles  of  the  Lutheran  Church 
witnessed;  that  Cranmer  occupied  the  same  stand-point 
with  the  framers  of  these  Articles,  in  the  controversy 
with  Rome  on  these  points,  are  historical  facts  which 
have  never  seriously  been  contested  since  they  have 
been  distinctly  pointed  out.  "  The  sense  of  these  Arti- 
cles, therefore,  is  to  be  ascertained  mainly  by  a  reference 
to  the  controversies  of  Lutheranism  with  Romanism. 

The  intimate  relation  of  Cranmer  to  the  Continental 
Reformers  ;  his  efforts  to  unite  with  the  Reformed 
Churches  in  a  common  confession  of  faith;  his  repeated 
attempts  to  secure  the  presence  of  Melancthon  in  Eng- 
land, and  his  services  in  completing  the  Reformation,  are 
facts  lying  open  distinctly  upon  the  surface  of  the  history 
of  that  period.  The  attempt,  therefore,  to  interpret  the 
Articles,  on  the  supposition  of  a  reference  in  them,  favor- 

"  Pages  96,  97.  ~~~ 

'^^  Lawrence's  Bampton  Lectures. 


366  AfTICLES  RELATING  TO 

able  or  hostile,  to  the  system  of  Calvin,  cannot  be  suc- 
cessful. Their  true  meaning  can  be  ascertained  only 
by  a  knowledge  of  the  errors  which  they  contemplated, 
and  the  opposing  truths  which  it  was  their  purpose  to 
assert.  "'' 

The  Article  on  Original  Sin  needs  this  light.  "'  The 
Schoolmen  and  Theologians  of  the  Church  of  Rome  laid 
the  foundation  for  a  false  system  of  Theology  in  an  un- 
scriptural  view  of  original  sin.  The  soul  comes,  they 
declare,  pure  from  God.  The  body,  by  the  fall,  has 
received  and  transmits  a  contagion.  This  is  not  sin, 
but  furnishes  the  fuel  of  sin,  which  the  will,  at  its  plea- 
sure, kindles.  By  his  fall  man  lost  original  righteous- 
ness, which  was  an  ornament,  whose  presence  merited 
God's  favor,  but  whose  loss  did  not  d  rcctly  and  de- 
servedly subject  him  to  t"he  wrath  of  God.  -  This  loss 
furnished  occasio?i  by  which  the  will,  acting  on  the 
suggestions  of  a  corrupted  corporeal  system,  made  the 
soul  to  sin.  Now,  in  opposition  to  this  theory,  our  Ar- 
ticles assert  that  man  is  very  far  gone'^"^  from  original 
righteotjsness,  and  is  of  his  own  nature  inclined  to  evil. 
It  declares,  also,  that  this  original  sin  deserves  God's 

^^This  is  abundantly  and  conclusively  proved  in  Lawrence's 
Bampton  Lectures.  See  pp.  235,  248.  And  yet  while  this  fact  is 
abundantly  proved  by  Archbishop  Lawrence,  his  representation  of 
what  actually  was  the  doctrine  of  Luther  and  the  Lutheran  confes- 
sions, is  often  singularly  inaccurate.  This  is  particularly  the  case 
in  his  explanation  of  the  doctrine  of  justification. 

^■^  In  the  first  draught,  under  Edward,  after  the  words  "  as  the 
Pelagians  do  vainly  talk,"  the  expression  "  and  at  this  day  the  Ana- 
baptists repeat,"  is  added. 

^* "  duam  longissin^e  distat."  Strong  language,  but  falling  short 
of  the  Calvinistic  formularies.. 


CHRISTIANS    AS    INDIVIDUALS.  367 

wrath,  -"that  it  inheres  in  those  who  are  regenerate,  and 
that  concupiscence  and  lust  hath  the  nature  of  sin. 
Thus  our  Church  defines  original  sin  to  be  an  inwrought 
infection  of  the  soul,  and  not  merely  the  loss  of  an  or- 
namental grace,  which  left  the  spiritual  man  without  an 
inborn  taint.  -^  In  declaring  that  a  corrupted  nature 
deserves  wrath,  and  that  concupiscence  hath  the  nature 
ol  sin,  it  does  but  set  its  seal  to  the  universal  sentiment 
of  man  that  guilt  attaches,  not  only  to  the  outward  act, 
but  to  the  inward  character,  and  to  the  motives  whence 
it  proceeds. 

The  Article  on  Free  Will  consisted,  originally,  of  the 
last  sentence  alone.  The  first  sentence  was  added  un- 
der Elizabeth,  and  is  taken  from  the  confession  of  Wirt- 
emburg,  published  in  1551.  It  asserts  the  inability  of 
man,  of  his  own  strength,  to  exercise  faith,  to  call  upon 
God,  and  to  do  works  pleasant  and  acceptable  to  God. 
To  do  this  God's  preventing  grace  must  give  us  a  good 

^®"Sua  nalura  digna  morte."    Of  its  own  nature  deserves  death. 

AuGSBIIKCH    CuNFESSIONS,  p.  9. 

'"That  subtle  modem  apologist  of  Romanism,  Moehler,  though 
he  vindicates  the  present  theology  of  the  Romish  Church  on  this 
point,  is  compelled  to  confess  the  truth  of  the  above  representation. 

"This  theory  (viz.,  that  of  the  contamination  of  the  soul  at  the 
moment  of  its  union  with  the  body)  was  rejected  by  most  of  the 
Schoolmen,  and  instead  of  this  another  was  adopted,  viz.,  that  with 
the  exception  of  his  lieritaLie  of  guilt,  fallen  man  is  born  exactly  like 
Adiim,  when  considered  wilhmit  Ins  sujitrnatural  p-aces — that  is  to  say 
with  all  the  natural  faculties,  power,  and  properties  of  the  Paradisaic 
man — as  well  as  tvilhout  any  quality  evil  in  i/sei/."  Moehler's 
Symbolism,  p.  141.  it  will  be  observed  that  this  is  in  precise  oppo 
sition  to  the  statement  of  ourArtide. 


368  ARTICLES  RELATING  TO 

will,  and  that  grace  must  work  with  us  when  we  have 
a  good  will.  In  this  Article  Pelagianism  is  avoided  on 
the  one  hand,  and  Fatalism  on  the  other.  Like  the  pre- 
vious Article,  it  can  be  truly  understood  only  by  refer- 
ence to  the  errors  which  it  contests.  ^■^ 

The  doctrine  of  this  Article  is  closely  connected  with 
that  on  original  sin.  The  Schoolmen  contended  that  man 
by  nature  could  resist  evil,  but  could  not  deserve  life.  But 
by  living  free  from  sin,  he  could,  without  grace,  merit 
grace.  This  was  called  the  merit  of  congruity.  Then, 
when  grace  was  given  and  improved,  more  grace  would 
be  merited.  This  was  the  merit  of  condignity.  From 
these  two  doctrines  flowed  many  unscriptural  views,  such 
as  the  merit  of  good  works,  or  works  of  devotion,  when 
performed  without  any  spiritual  affection's,  and  the  ac- 
cumulation of  merit,  by  condignity,  which  might  be  ac- 
counted to  another. 

Against  these  pernicious  and  proud  claims  the  Article 
distinctly  witnesses.  It  asserts  the  impossibility  of 
man's  preparing  himself  by  his  own  strength,  to  faith 
and  calling  upon  God.  The  v^oid preparing  has  manifest 
reference  to  the  merit  of  congruity.  It  declares  that 
God's  preventing  grace  must  give  us  a  good  will;  and 

^**This  Article  was  followed  in  the  first  draught  of  Edward  by 
another,  entitled  "  of  grace,"  which  was  as  follows  :  "  The  grace  of 
God,  or  the  Holy  Ghost  by  him  given,  doth  take  away  the  stony 
heart,  and  giveth  an  heart  of  flesh;  and  although  those  that  have  no 
will  to  good  things,  he  maketh  them  to  will;  and  those  that  would 
evil  things,  he  maketh  them  not  to  will  the  same;  yet,  nevertheless, 
he  enforcelh  not  the  will;  and  therefore  no  man,  when  he  sinneth, 
can  excuse  himself  as  not  worthy  to  be  blamed,  or  condemned,  by 
alleging  that  he  sinned  unwillingly  by  compulsion." 


CHRISTIANS    AS    INDIVIDUALS.  369 

that,  when  it  is  obtained,  that  grace  must  still  work  with 
it.  And  yet  the  Article  avoids  fatalism  or  the  doctrine 
of  philosophical  necessity.  It  does  not  annihilate  the 
will.  It  denies  its  power  only  in  reference  to  good  pur- 
poses toward f<  God.  It  does  not  even  assert  the  direct 
action  of  grace  on  the  will,  but  its  necessity  in  the  souly 
previous  to  the  action  of  the  will,  that  it  may  act  aright. 
And  when  grare  is  ijiven,  it  is  not  spoken  of  as  acting 
in  us  or  t/irousr/i  us,  but  with  us.  This  is  language 
as  studiously  distant  from  the  fatalism  of  the  one  school, 
as  it  is  from  the  proud  claim  to  merit  of  the  other. 

The  thirteenth  Article,  "  of  Works  before  Justifica- 
tion," naturally  follow.^,  and  does  but  develope  the 
doctrine  of  that  on  free  will.  It  contemplates  the  same 
errors,  and  asserts  the  same  truth.  The  one  Article 
contemplates  the  power  in  the  will,  and  the  other  the 
manifestation  of  that  power  in  good  works.  The  one 
denies  the  strength  of  the  unsanctified  will,  and  the 
other  the  congruous  merit  of  works  done  before  justifi- 
cation.'^  The  fourteenth  Article  has  reference  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  merit  of  condignity,  and  denies  the 
possibility  of  works  of  supererogation,  which  are  de- 
scribed as  "salutary  works,  over  and  above  God's  com- 
mandments."*'    The  fifteenth  Article  is  another  link 

'"  Yet  the  distinction  between  right  and  wrong  is  not  by  this  Ar- 
ticle destroyed.  All  that  is  asserted  is</ta(,  in  reference  to  God,  works 
which  do  not  spring  from  faith  in  Christ  are  not  pleasant  to  God, 
nor  make  men  meet  to  receive  grace  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  have  the 
nature  of  sin. — See  Burnet  on  the  .Articles,  pp.  159-'61.  Lawrence^s 
Appendix  to  Sermon  bth 

^"Some  of  the  language  of  this  Article  is  very  similar  to  that  of 
the  Augsburgh  Confession  on  the  same  subject. — Corpus,  &c.,p.  12. 

16* 


37(X  ARTICLES    RELATING   TO 

in  this  doctrinal  chain,  <<  being  put  here,"  says  Bishop 
Burnet,  "  as  another  foundation  against  all  works  of 
supererogation."  That  Christ  is  "alone  without  sin," 
is  a  truth  which  destroys  all  pretence  to  works  of  super- 
erogation on  the  part  of  human  saints.  They  must  tirst 
be  perfect,  without  sin,  before  they  can  be  more  than 
perfect,  and  thus  transfer  their  goodness  to  the  account 
of  others.  But  there  are  none  without  sin,  but  Christ 
alone. 

The  Article  on  "the  Justification  of  Man,"  contem- 
plates substantially  the  same  errors  in  the  Romish 
Church  as  those  which  we  have  considered.  Her  doc- 
trine on  this  point  is  calculated  to  give  the  soul  up  to 
despair,  or  to  lull  it  into  false  and  pernicious  pea;cp  The 
sinner  must  first,  by  penitence,  merit  grace.  This  peni- 
tence, of  which  the  natural  man  is  capable,  is  attrition. 
Grace  being  given,  he  then,  by  the  aid  of  it,  exercises 
penitence  anew,  which  changes  its  character  from  a 
natural  to  a  supernatural  work,  and  is  called  contrition. 
Thus  his  justification  is  complete.  The  sacrament  of 
penance  can  be  resorted  to,  that  the  grace  of  repentance 
or  the  merit  of  congruity  may  be  obtained,  so  that  grace 
may  certainly  be  won,  and  justification  be  completed.^' 
Justification,  then,  in  their  view,  is  the  effect  of  di- 
vine grace  infused  into  the  soul.  Man  is  justified  be- 
cause of  a  righteousness  of  his  own. 

On    this    point    the    Reformers    were  strenuous    and 
decided  in  their  opposition  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  The 

■"See  Hooker's  unequalled  and  accurate  account  of  tlie  flifffrencc 
between  the  Romish  and  the  Church  of  England  doctrine. 

Hooker''s  Worlcs,  vol.  ii,  Sermonon  Jtistijication,  sec.  5,  p.  299. 


CHRISTIANS    AS    INDIVIDUALS.  371 

great  soul  of  Luther  agonized  in  its  efforts  to  overturn 
this  error,  and  establish  in  its  place  the  long  prostrate 
and  covered  truth.  On  this  great  truth  the  Article  is 
clear  and  emphatic.  It  is  at  i>sue  with  Rome  at  every 
point. 

The  one  declares  we  o?-e  righteous;  the  other  that  we 
are  nccouvfed  righteous. 

The  one  holds  to  an  acturii  righteousness  by  works 
and  dese?-vi/igs :  and  the  other  to  an  accounted  righteous- 
ness hy  faith. 

The  one  makes  us  to  be  jvfifified  because  we  are  Just ; 
the  other  makes  us  Justified  because  we,  by  faith,  have 
accounted  to  us  the  merit  of  another,  who  alone  is  just.^^ 

The  one  confounds  sanctification  with  justification; 
the  other  treats  of  justification  as  a  separate  work, 
which  precedes  sanctification.^'' 

Viewed,  then,  in  reference  to  the  doctrine  of  Rome, 
which  it  opposes,  and  to  that  of  the  Homily  by  which 
it  is  to  be  interpreted,  the  Article  seems  to  assert  the 
following  propositions: 

By  justification  is  meant  a  state  of  acceptance  and 
favo  with  God,  into  which  persons  previously  con- 
demned have  passed.** 


•^'"  Christ  is  n^w  the  righleoiKsnesa  of  all  them  thai  truly  do  be- 
lieve in  him.  Hp  pnid  f'Tlhem  tlipir  ransom  by  his  death.  He  for 
them  fulfilled  the  law  iii  his  life.  So  that  now,  in  him,  and  by  him, 
every  true  Christian  mHu  may  be  called  a  fnlfiiler  of  the  law  ;  for- 
asmuch as  that  which  their  infirmity  lacked  Chri.st's  ju.stice  hath 
supplied." — Homilies,  p.  20. 

33  Hooker,  vol.  ii,  301. 

^*  Homilies,  p.  17.     Burnet  on  the  Articles,  p.  149. 


372  ARTICLES  RELATING  TO 

Into  that  state  we  come  not  by  our  own  works  or 
descrvings.^"  We  do  not  become  justified  because  we 
have  become  just,  and  thus  entitled  to  acquittal  from 
condemnation,  and  reinstalment  into  the  favor  of  God.'"^ 

But  we  are  justified  because  we  are  accounted  righte- 
ous.^' 

We  are  accounted  righteous  only  for  ihe  merits  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.^" 

The  merits  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  are  accounted  to 
us  hy  faith. 

It  is  hy  faith  only  that  those  merits  of  the  Saviour  are 
accounted  to  us,  by  which  we  are  saved.^^ 

^^Jewel's  Apology,  p.  68. 

36  <i  "phe  risjhteousness  wlierewith  we  shall  he  clothed  in  the 
world  to  come,  is  both  perfect  and  inherent.  That  whereby  we  are 
justified  is  perfect,  but  not  inherent.  That  by  which  wp  are  sancti- 
fied is  inherent,  but  not  perfect. — Hooker,  vol.  ii,  p.  299. 

3'  We  have  already  showed  that  there  are  but  two  kinds  of  Chri.s- 
tian  righteousness;  the  one  without  us,  which  we  have  hy  imputa- 
tion; the  other  in  us,  which  consisteth  of  faith,  hope,  charity,  and 
other  Christian  graces ;  and  St.  James  doth  prove  tli at  Abraham 
had  not  only  the  one,  because  the  thing  he  believed  was  imputed  to 
him  for  righteousness,  but  also  the  other,  because  he  offered  up  his 
son. — Hooker,  vol.  ii,  p.  308. 

38 '<  Because  all  men  be  sinners  and  offenders  against  God," — 
"every  man  of  necessity  is  constrained  to  seek  for  another  righte- 
ousness of  justification,  to  be  received  at  God's  own  hands — that  is  to 
say,  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins  and  trespasses  in  such  things  as  he 
hath  offended." — Homily  on  Salvation,  part  i,  p.  17. 

3^  For  the  right  and  true  Christian  faith  is  not  only  to  believe 
that  Holy  Scripture,  and  all  the  foresaid  Articles  of  our  faith  are 
true,  but  also  to  have  sure  trust  and  confidence  in  God's  merciful 
providence  to  be  saved,  from  everlasting  damnation,  by  Christ. 

Homilies,  p.  26. 


CHRISTIANS    AS     INDIVIDUALS.  373 

These  are  the  positive  teachings  of  the  Article.  The 
Homily  guards  the  doctrine  from  misapprehensions  and 
groundless  inferences. 

The  object  of  the  Article  is  to  treat  of  justification 
alone;  and  therefore  it  notices  only  the  means  by  which 
this  blessing  is  to  be  secured.  What  is  lo  precede  or 
accompany  or  follow  justification,  it  is  no  part  of  its 
purpose  to  assert  or  deny.*' 

Nevertheless  there  is  nothing  in  the  Article  from 
which  it  can  be  inferred  that  repentance  and  other 
graces  and  good  works  are  not  to  accompany  and  follow 
faith,  but  only  that  tlioy  have  no  part  in  justifying.'" 
The  succeeding  Article  declares  that  good  works  neces- 
sarily spring  from  a  lively  faith. 

Nor  can  it  be  concluded  that  faith  i*  itselt  a  good 
work,  because  of  which  God  extends  to  us  this  blessing. 
It  is  but  the  unmeriting  instrument  by  which  we  lay 
hold  of  it      It  is  the  hand  which  takes  the  gift." 

*•' Neither  doth  faith  shut  out  the  justice  of  our  good  works,  ne- 
cessarily to  be  done  aftorwards,  of  duty  towards  God  ;  but  it  ex- 
cluieth  them,  so  that  we  may  not  do  them  to  this  intent,  to  be  made 
just  by  doing  them. — Homily,  pp.  19,  21. 

""  And  so  the  jjmcm;  of  God  only  shntteth  out  the  justice  of  our 
works  H.s  to  be  merits  of  deservinj^  our  justification.  —  Romily,  p.  19. 
And  yei  ihai  faith  doth  not  shut  out  repentance,  liope,  love,  dread, 
iind  ihr  fear  of  God,  to  be  joined  with  faith  in  every  man  that  is  jus- 
!i  led  ;  l>ui  it  shutteth  them  out  fi(>m  office  of  justifying. 

Homily,  pp.  19,  21 . 

*'  The  true  understanding  of  this  doctrine  is  not  that  this,  our  own 
act  to  believe  in  Christ,  or  this,  our  faith  in  Christ,  which  is  within  us 
doe^  justify  us,  and  deserve  our  justification  unto  us,  &c.,  p.  23. 

"So  that, as  St.  John  Baptist,  although  he  were  never  so  virtuous 


374  ARTICLES    RELATING    TO 

Nor  can  it  be  made  to  conflict  with  the  truth  that 
Christ  is  the  one  only  cause  and  means  of  our  justifica- 
tion."    Rather  it  is  the  complement  of  that  truth.** 

Nor  can  it  be  perverted  without  gross  injustice,  to  the 

and  godly  a  man,  yet  in  this  matter  of  forgiving  sin,  he  did  put  the 
people  from  him,  and  appoint  them  unto  Clirist,  saying  unto  them: 
"Behold,  yonder  is  the  Lamb  of  God,  which  taketh  away  the  sins 
of  the  world.  Even  so  great  and  godly  a  virtue  as  the  lively 
faith  is,  yet  it  putteth  us  from  itself,  and  remittelh  or  appointeth  us 
unto  Christ,  for  to  have  only  from  him  remission  of  our  sins  or 
justification.  So  that  our  faith  in  Christ  saith  unto  us  thus:  It  is 
not  I  that  take  away  your  sins,  but  it  is  Christ  only,  and  to  bim 
only  I  send  you  for  that  purpose,  forsaking  therein  ail  your  good 
virtues,  words,  thoughts,  and  works,  and  only  [tutting  your  trust  in 
Christ." — Homily,  p.  23. 

Burnet''s  account  of  faith  is  very  unsatisfactory. — Burnet  on  the 
Articles,  p.  150. 

■•^  But  this  saying,  that   we  be  justified  by  faith   only  freely  and 

without  works,  is  spoken  for  to wholly  ascribe  the  merit  and 

deserving  of  our  justification  to  Christ  only,  and  his  most  precious 
blood  shedding.  This  faith  the  Holy  Scripture  teacheth  us  ;  this  is 
the  strong  rock  and  foundation  of  Christian  reHgion  ;  this  doctrine 
all  old  and  ancient  authors  of  Christ's  Church  do  approve  ;  this  doc- 
trine advanceth  and  setteth  forth  the  true  glory  of  Christ,  and  beateth 
doion  the  vain  glory  of  man;  this,  v.  Iio.soever  desireth,  is  not  to  be 
accounted  for  a  Christian  mati,  nor  for  a  setter  forth  of  Christ's 
glory  ;  but  for  an  adversary  to  Christ  and  his  gospel,  and  a  setter 
forth  of  man's  vainglory. — p.  22. 

■•^  Nevertheless  because  faith  doth  directly  send  u.s  to  Christ  for 
remission  of  our  sins,  and  that  by  faith  given  us  of  God,  we  em- 
brace the  promise  of  God's  mercy,  and  of  the  remission  of  our  sins — 
which  thing  none  other  of  our  virtues  or  works  properly  doeih^- 
therefore  the  Scripture  useth  to  say  that  faith  without  works  dolh 
justify. — Homilies,  p.  25. 


CHRISTIANS    AS    INDIVIDUALS.  375 

support  of  the  idea  that  we  are  justified,  because  we 
beheve  we  are/'^ 

The  single  purpose  of  the  Article  is  to  assert  the 
blessed,  wholesome,  and  most  comforting  truth,  that  the 
condemned  sinner,  lying  under  the  wrath  and  curse  of 
God,  and  unable,  by  any  works  or  deservings  of  his  own, 
to  get  back  into  his  favor,  may,  by  the  exercise  of  faith 
in  Christ,  have  his  merit  accounted  to  him,  and  thus  be 
|u-tified.  Surely,  (his  is  alike  wholesome,  or  health- 
giving  and  comfortable  truth.  The  soul  needs  it  in  the 
hour  when  it  realizes  its  iniquity.  It  needs  it  in  the 
moment  of  its  purest  love  and  most  burning  zeal.  It 
needs  it,  and  breaks  out  into  singing  because  of  it,  at 
the  hour  of  death.  Only  as  "being  justified  by  faith" 
can  "we  have  peace  with  God." 

It  has  been  contended  by  some  that  the  seventeenth 
Article  teaches  Calvin's  doctrine  of  predestination.  By 
others,  it  has  been  explained  away  into  a  testimony 
against  that  doctrine.  By  yet  others,  it  has  been  as- 
serted that,  in  an  etfort  to  compromise  conflicting  state- 
ments, the  conclusion  of  the  Article  is  made  to  contra- 
dict its  commencement;  so  that,  in  fact,  it  teaches 
nothing.  Our  conviction  is,  that  neither  of  these  state- 
ments can  be  supported;  but  that  the  Article  does  set 
forth  the  predestination,  not  of  Calvin  or  Arminius,  but 
of  the  Bible. 

It  does  not  teach  Calvin's  doctrine;  for  that  included 
a  predestination   to  death,  or   a  decree  of  reprobation; 

**This  is  the  constant  Romish  representation  of  the  Protestant 
view. — See  Bossuet  in  his  '' Variutions^^  and  Mahler  in  his  Symbolism. 


376  ARTICLES  RELATING  TO 

and  it  grounded  the  decree  on  the  absolute  sovereignty 
of  God.      On  both  these  points  the  Article  is  silent. 

It  does  not  teach  the  doctrine  of  Arminius.  That 
grounds  God's  foredetermination  on  the  foreknowledge 
of  the  faith  and  obedience  of  the  Elect.*** 

But  is  it  not  inconsistent?  Is  not  the  last  paragraph 
contradictory  to  the  first.?  We  answer,  that  the  Article 
leaves  the  subject  in  the  same  kind  of  difficulty  in  which 
it  is  left  by  the  word  of  God. 

The  doctrine  of  man's  corruption  and  spiritual  help- 
lessness had  been  announced,  and  the  need  of  prevent- 
ing grace  proclaimed.  If  preventing  grace  is  needed 
before  man  can  turn  towards  God — before  he  can  pre- 
pnre  himself  to  turn  to  God — then  the  question  is  set- 
tled, that  God  clw  ,.ses  nan  and  not  man  God.  If,  in 
addition  to  this  statement,  that  God  chooses  inan,  the 
Scriptures  also  announce,  as  assuredly  they  do,  that 
God  thus  chooses  man  in  accordance  with  a  predeter- 
mination to  do  so,  shall  not  a  Church,  whose  only  rule 
of  faith  is  the  word  of  God,  distinctly  embody  this  de- 
claration? The  difficulty  of  understanding  the  subject, 
or  of  reconciling  it  with  the  free  agency  of  man.  is  not 
increased  in  the  slightest  degree  by  adding  to  the  truth, 
that  God's  preventing  grace  gives  man  a  good  will,  the 

^®The  Article  IS  interpi-eted  by  Lawrence,  Bishop  White,  and 
ofher-s,  to  have  reference  to  a  Church  election,  or  election  of  the 
Church  nut  of  the  world.  The  fact  that  good  rnen  can  bring  their 
minds  to  believe  this  in  face  of  the  clear  statement  of  the  Article 
itself,  is  proof  of  the  amazing  influence  of  prejudice  and  desire. 
The  Article  assuredly  calls  only  those  predestinated  who  attain 
everlasting  felicity.  This  cannot  be  true  of  the  visible  Church.  It 
must  be  a  caUing  of  individuals  out  of  tlie  visible  Church  ;  not  of 
the  visible  Church  out  of  the  world. 


CHRISTIANS    AS    INDIVIDUALS.  377 

other  truth  that  this  gift  had  been  determined  upon  from 
the  foundation  of  the  world. 

In  the  concluding  portion  of  the  Article,  the  declara- 
tion that  the  promises  of  God  are  to  be  received  in  such 
wise  as  they  are  generally  set  forth  in  holy  Scripture, 
seems  to  us  an  announcement  that  the  task  of  reconcil- 
ing these  two  great  truths — God's  predestination,  and 
our  obligation  to  take  the  promises  of  God  as  they  are 
generally  set  forth,  or  set  forth  to  all — is  declined.  That 
the  doctrine  of  our  election  in  Christ  is  sweet  to  the 
believer,  and  perilous  for  the  curious  and  carnal,  is  a 
remark  which  applies  equally  to  the  doctrine  of  pre- 
venting grace.  In  the  one  case,  the  carnal  mind  asks 
"if  I  can  do  nothing,  how  am  I  responsible;  or,  what 
can  I  do  but  wait  till  God's  grace  visit  me?"  In  the 
other,  he  asks  tf  -•  .'■inie  question  in  another  form:  "If  I 
am  chosen,  will  not  grace  come  without  my  effort;  and 
if  not  chosen,  is  not  all  effort  of  no  avail?" 

We  thus  briefly  discuss  this  Article,  from  an  unwil- 
lingness to  plunge  into  an  abyss  from  which  each  new 
diver  brings  up  only  additional  mud,  with  no  new  pearls 
of  illustration  or  of  argument.  We  conclude  this  subject 
with  the  following  judicious  remarks  by  Blunt,  in  his 
History  of  the  Reformation: 

"  It  would  not  fall  within  the  plan  of  a  work  like  the 
present  to  enter  more  minutely  into  these  investigations, 
which  are,  after  all,  as  a  hedge  of  thorns.  Suffice  it  to 
have  pointed  out  the  general  principle,  which  should 
not  be  lost  sight  of  in  forming  a  judgment  of  our  Arti- 
cles. Thus  considered  they  will  scarcely  be  thought  to 
determine,  or  be  intended  to  determine^  the  peculiar  points 


378  ARTICLES    RELATING 

of  the  Calvinistic  controversy  either  way;  they  will  be 
rather  thought  to  be  composed  simply  for  the  purpose 
assigned  in  the  title  affixed  to  the  original  Articles,  for 
the  avoiding  of  controversy  in  opinion,  and  the  establish- 
ment of  a  good  concord  in  matters  of  religion;  an  object 
not  likely  to  be  obtained  by  the  decided  adoption  of 
any  party  views,  be  that  party  what  it  might;  and,  there- 
fore, King  Ja;mes,  according  to  his  declaration  prefixed 
to  the  Articles,  '  took  comfort  that  all  clergymen  within 
his  realm  had  always  most  willingly  subscribed  to  the 
Articles  established;'  which  is  an  argument,  (he  adds,) 
that  they  all  agree  in  the  true  usual  literal  meaning  of 
the  said  Articles,  and  that  even  in  those  curious  points 
in  which  the  present  ditficulties  lie,  men  of  all  sorts 
take  the  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England  to  be  for 
them.  Yet  nothing  can  be  more  certain  than  that,  in 
the  time  of  James,  the  divisions  of  opinion  upon  spec- 
ulative points  of  theology  were  both  wide  and  numerous; 
High  and  Low  Church  principles  (as  they  were  called) 
never  having  been  more  violently  opposed  to  each  other 
than  then.  Here,  therefore,  as  in  all  other  of  their  mea- 
sures, did  the  Reformers  make  their  moderation  known 
to  all  men,  not  hoping  or  desiring  to  confine  religious 
opinion  so  closely  as  thereby  to  piejuiiice  religious  sin- 
cerity, nor  expecting  that  the  pyramid  of  a  National 
Church  would  stand  firm,  when  set  upon  an  apex  instead 
of  a  base." 

The  Article  upon  Sin  after  Baptism  appears  to  have 
contemplated  the  error  of  the  Anabaptists,  who  helfl 
every  sin  committed  after  Baptism  unpardonable.  It 
asserts  that  even  those  sins  which  are  in  their  nature 


TO    THE    CHURCH.  379 

deadly  and  ruinoub  to  grace,  may  by  the  grace  of  God 
be  pardoned,  so  that  the  transgressor  may  be  received 
again  into  God's  favor. 

Articles  relating  to  the  Church. 

The  nineteenth  Article  is  thus  commented  upon  by 
Bishop  Burnet:  "  This  article,  together  with  some  that 
follow  it,  relates  to  the  fundamental  difference  between 
us  and  the  Church  of  Rome,  they  teaching  that  we  are 
to  judge  of  the  doctrines  by  the  authority  and  decisions 
of  the  Church;  whereas  we  affirm  that  we  are  first  to 
examine  the  doctrine,  and  according  to  that  to  judge  of 
the  purity  of  the  Church.  *' 

Acting  on  this  principle  the  Church  here  gives  her 
definition  of  the  visible  Church  of  Christ.  It  is  very 
general.  Where  the  pure  Word  of  God  is  preached,  and 
the  Sacraments  are  duly  administered  according  to 
Christ's  ordinance,  in  all  things  that  are  of  necessity 
requisite  to  the  same,  there  is  a  portion  of  the  visible 
Church  of  Christ.^ 

The  latter  part  of  the  Article  denies  the  infallibility 
of  the  Church  of  Rome. 

^'  Burnet  oii  the  Articles. 

'•''This  is  the  definition  of  the  Church  which  is  given  in  King  Ed- 
wanl's  and  Noel's  Catt  hi.sni,  by  all  the  Reformers  and  by  the  Con- 
tinental Confessions.  The  author  is  engaged  in  a  preparation  of  a 
work  nn  the  Church  and  ministry,  in  which  the  whole  subject  is 
discussed  at  length,  and  the  testimonies  of  the  Reformers,  public  and 
private,  are  gathered.  The  result  of  the  inquiry  is  a  perfect  demon- 
stration that  the  dogma  of  later  times,  which  makes  Episcopacy 
necessary  to  the  existence  of  the  Church,  and  the  administration  of 
Sacraments,  was  not  only  not  held  by  them,  but  had  not  even  been 
broached  among  them. 


380  ARTICLES    ON 

The  authority  of  the  Church  to  decree  rites  and  cere- 
monies, and  her  authority  in  controversies  of  faith,  is 
asserted  by  the  twentieth  Article.  .  The  declaration  in 
the  previous  Article  that  the  various  Churches  of  Jeru- 
salem, Alexandria,  Antioch,  and  Rome,  have  erred 
even  in  matters  of  faith,  conclusively  proves  that  this 
Article  contains  no  claim  for  the  Church  universal  or 
national,  that  she  can  decide  what  is  absolutely  true, 
and  thus  establish  divine  truth  in  controversies  of  faith; 
but  that  it  is  lawful  for  a  Church  to  decide  for  herself 
and  her  children  what  shall  be  held,  within  her  Com- 
munion, to  be  the  doctrine  of  God's  Word,  and  what 
rites  or  ceremonies  shall  be  practised.  Providentially 
the  keeper  of  Holy  Writ,  and  thus  a  witness  to  its  au- 
thenticity, she  must  ordain  nothing  contrary  to  God's 
word  written,  on  the  ground  of  a  word  unwritten.  ^^ 

In  the  next  three  Articles  several  errors  are  wit- 
nessed against.  Purgatory,  the  worship  of  image  and 
relics,  and  the  invocation  of  Saints  are  denounced  as  hu- 
man inventions,  repugnant  to  the  Word  of  God.  The 
unlawfulness  of  exercising  the  office  of  preaching  and 
administering  the  Sacraments  in  the  Church,  without 
being  called  and  sent  by  the  constituted  authorities  of 
the  Church,  and  the  speaking  in  the  Church  in  an  un- 
known tongue,  are  next  denounced.  The  first  error  had 
reference  to  the  Anabaptists,  and  the  second  to  the 
Church  of  Rome. 

■•^See  note  on  page 


VARIOUS    SUBJECTS.  381 

Articles    which    have   reference   to    the   Sacra- 
ments. ''° 

The  doctrine  of  the  Sacraments,  as  set  forth  in  the 
Liturgy  and  Articles,  has  been  so  fully  illustrated  in  these 
pages,  that  we  need  not  here  dwell  upon  the  meaning  of 
the  Articles.  That  they  are  signs  and  seals  of  grace, 
and  that  they  are  the  m^ans  of  grace  only  to  the  peni- 
tent and  believing,  is  the  sum  of  their  positive  teaching. 
The  errors  against  which  they  witness  are  chiefly  •those 
ot  Rome 

Articles  on  various  subjects. 

The  remaining  Articles,  from  the  thirty-second  to  the 
thirty-ninth,  are  devoted  to  various  subjects.  The 
lawfulness  of  the  marriage  of  Priests  is  asserted.  Ex- 
communicated persons,  as  it  is  declared,  should  be  held 
as  heathen  men  and  publicans.  Traditions  and  cere- 
monies may  lawfully  differ  in  different  countries,  and 
each  national  Church  may  ordain  them  for  itself.  The 
book  of  Homilies  is  commended  as  containing  '*  godly 
and  wholesome  doctrine,  and  necessary  for  the  times," 
with  a  note  to  the  effect  that  the  references  in  them  to 
the  constitution  and  laws  of  England  are  inapplicable 
to  this  country,  and  that  the  order  for  reading  them 
in  Church  is  suspended,  until  they  shall  have  been  re- 
vised. The  consecration  and  ordination  services  are 
vindicated  as  including  everything  necessary  to  a  true 
consecration  and  ordination,  and  as  being  free  from  all 

='OFrom  the  XXV  to  the  XXXI  Articles. 


382 


ARTICLES    ON 


superstition.  The  power  of  the  civil  magistrate  over 
the  clergy  in  things  temporal,  and  the  absence  of  all 
authority  on  his  part  in  things  spiritual,  is  asserted.  The 
community  of  goods  of  Christians  is  denied;  and  the 
lawfulness  of  oaths  to  the  magistrate  is  asserted.   ' 

In  concluding  this  slight  sketch  of  the  Articles,  we 
cannot  forbear  to  express  the  full  conviction  that  time 
is  proving  them  to  be,  on  the  whole,  the  best  confession 
of  faith  ever  announced  by  a  Christian  Church.  It 
was  formed  in  a  time  of  excitement  and  excess,  and  yet 
its  chief  trait  is  a  calm  and  discriminating  moderation. 

""'  It  was  the  purpose  of  the  Author  to  have  given  a  much  more 
complete  account  of  the  Articles,  and  to  have  added  a  no  less  full 
explanation  of  the  Ordination  Services.  The  size  to  which  this  hook 
had  swollen  admonished  him  to  forbear,  [t  is  hoped,  however, 
that  the  irfea  of  his  work — that  of  interpreting  the  Prayer-Book  by 
its  History — is  to  some  extent  realized  in  this  chapter.  He  has 
indicated  the  sources  from  which  the  Articles  were  derived,  and 
the  principles  of  the  framers  of  them  by  which  they  are  to  be  ex- 
plained. 

The  Ordination  Services,  and  especially  the  preface  to  them,  and 
the  xix  Article,  will  be  fully  discussed  in  the  work  of  which  men- 
tion has  been  made.     (Note  48.) 

"  The  form  of  consecration  of  a  Church  or  Chapel  was  adopted 
by  the  General  Convention  of  1795.  It  was  substantially  the  same 
as  the  service  composed  by  Bishop  Andrews,  in  the  reign  of  James 
the  First.  It  is  commonly  used  by  the  English  Bishops  in  such 
consecrations,  but  without  the  authority  of  any  Convention  or  act  of 
Parliament." — Bishop  Brownell,  p.  770. 

"  The  office  of  Institution  was  first  adopted  by  the  General  Con- 
vention of  1804,  and  finally  established  by  the  Convention  of  1808; 
the  name  being  changed  from  "  induction,"  to  "  institution,"  and  its 
use  being  made  to  rest  on  recommendation,  and  not  requisition,  as  at 
first." — Bishop  Brownell,  p.  773. 


VARIOUS    SUBJECTS.  383 

The  position  which  the  Church  took  in  her  controversy 
with  Rome,  which  seemed  to  the  more  heated  enemies 
of  that  great  domination,  during  the  war,  to  be  as- 
sumed for  the  betrayal  of  the  cause,  was  discovered, 
after  the  campaign,  to  have  been  a  very  Citadel  of 
Gibraltar,  impregnable  in  itself,  and  a  commanding 
point  from  w^hich  to  dart  the  thunder  of  her  power. 
For  a  long  period  Churches  and  individuals  were  vio- 
lently in  favor  of,  or  violently  opposed  to,  the  system 
of  Calvin.  That  period  has  passed  by.  It  is  beginning 
to  be  felt  that  the  whole  subject  lies  beyond  the  range 
of  revealed  and  practical  theology,  and  that,  therefore, 
it  should  be  excluded  from  the  confessions  of  the 
Churches.  Some  Churches,  in  which  there  are  minute 
and  dogmatic  definitions  on  these  abstruse  theories, 
would,  we  are  persuaded,  if  tliey  were  now  to  form 
their  Articles  of  faith  anew,  altogether  dismiss  them 
from  their  confessions.  They  are  permitted  to  remain 
enshrined  in  catechisms  and  confessions,  but  are  not 
brought  forth  in  preaching.  They  were  once  the  living 
trees,  under  which  the  tabernacles  of  these  communions 
were  pitched.  They  are  now  a  deserted  fossilized 
forest,  whose  cold  and  skeleton  forms  look  grim  and 
fearful,  even  to  those  who  vi<it  them  as  the  scene  of 
the  old  homestead,  and  who  yet  wear  the  name  which 
indicates  them  as  their  birth-place  and  their  home. 
But  our  Temple  still  stands  amid  the  old  ancestral  trees 
planted  by  the  martyrs.  Time  strikes  their  roots  deep- 
er, and  throws  out  their  branches  broader,  and  makes 
their  majesty  venerable  and  graceful  with  the  soft 
green  mosses  of  sweet  and  sacred  association,  which 


384  CONCLUSION. 

have  gathered  over  them.  May  the  successive  gene- 
rations of  Churchmen,  as  they  enter  the  sanctuary,  still 
walk  under  their  shadows,  and  be  buried  at  their  feet ! 


CONCLUSIOiN. 

The  review  of  our  Book  of  Common-Prayer  has  im- 
pressed some  convictions  on  our  minds  with  peculiar 
vividness. 

It  has  made  us  feel  strong  in  the  conviction  that  the 
theories  of  Sacramental  grace,  and  of  Episcopacy  a? 
essential  to  the  being  of  the  Church  and  ministry,  find 
no  countenance  in  her  offices  and  Articles. 

It  has  suggested  to  us  the  great  and  glorious  work 
which  lies  before  us,  in  this  land,  if  we  are  true  to  our 
standards,  and  baptized  with  the  spirit  in  which  they 
were  framed.  Pure  in  doctrine;  conservative  in  spirit; 
entrenched  behind  the  breastwork  of  institutions  which 
will  bear  a  tremendous  pressure  from  without,  and  fear- 
ful explosions  from  within;  with  regulations  and  histo- 
rical associations  which  keep  alive  a  spirit  of  loyalty 
and  order,  ours  is  the  Church  fitted  for  this  hour  and 
for  this  land.  If  we  are  true  to  ourselves,  we  shall  he 
a  blessing  to  wandering,  inquiring,  and  bewildered 
multitudes. 

But  to  do  this,  we  must  forever  and  distinctly  cast 
aside  those  arrogant  and  unfounded  claims,  whose  very 
utterance  is  regarded  as  an  insult  by  the  members  of 
other  Churches,  who  hold  in  equal  honor  with  ourselves 
the  great  saving  and  distinctive  doctrines  of  the  Gospel. 


CONCLUSION.  385 

The  world  has  grown  too  old  for  them.     We  cannot  suc- 
ceed, and  we  ought  not  to  succeed,  if  we  adhere  to  them. 
The  pious  people  of  this  land  are  not  wanting  in  respect 
to  the  Episcopal  Church,  and  are  not  offended  at  her 
claims  to  an  Apostolic  Ministry  and   a  noble  Ritual. 
But  they  are  offended,  and  disgusted,  and  amused  when 
we  echo  the  spent  and  harmless  echoes  of  Romish  ar- 
rogance.    They  are  repelled  from  all  sympathy  with  us, 
and  diverted   from  a  candid  examination  of  our  real- 
claims,  when  they  are  told  by  anathematizing  Deacons 
that  they  are  left  to  uncovenanted  mercy,  and  are  alto- 
gether without  the  privileges  of  the  Ministry  and  the 
Church  of  Christ.     The  intelligent  members  of  the  com- 
munity, who  are  not  religious,  and  who  are  held  by 
slight  ties  to  other  Communions,  are  favorably  disposed 
towards  a  Church,  whose  sobriety  pleases,  and  whose 
services  impress  them.     But  in  vain  shall  we  seek  to 
impress  upon  them  to  any  great  extent,  a  system  of 
sacramental  and  ritual  religion — a  system  of  priestly 
power  and  exclusive  privilege — which  has  no  counte- 
nance in  the  Word  of  God.    The  Bible  is  this  J\ation^s 
Book.      It   is    in    the    parlor,    the    chamber,   and    the 
kitchen.     It  is  in  the  steamboat,  and  the  hotel.     It  is 
in  tlio  school-house,  at  the  book-stall,  and  in  the  count- 
ing-room.    The  mind  of  the  people  is  in  contact  with 
it,  and  grasps  its  great  and  distinctive  principles.     We 
cannot  gain  the  ear  and  impress  the  heart  of  the  people 
by  claims,  whose  grounds  they  do  not  see,  and  by  pre- 
tensions which  are  contradicted  by  that  which  they  can 
read,  even  as  they  run  to  and  fro  on  their  worldly  busi- 
nesses and  pleasures.     We  must  disown  these  claims. 
17 


386  CONCLUSION. 

We  cannot  prosper  with  them.  We  do  not  need  them. 
We  are  strong  without  them.  Oh,  that  we  may,  as  a 
Church,  cease  trifling  with  questions,  which  should  long 
since  have  been  consigned  to  the  tombs,  along  with 
other  "fables"  and  "endless  genealogies."  Oh,  that 
we  may  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire, 
and  go  forth  into  the  world,  with  loving  hearts  and 
earnest  voices,  proclaiming  Christ  and  him  crucified  to 
dying  men  ! 


^  p  p  c  n  b  i  J 


No.  I. 


PART  I. 

Consisli»g  of  srich  Collects  as  icere  retained  from  ancient  Liturgies  at 
the  Reformation. 
Collects  for  Whence  taken. 

4  Sunday  in  Advent.  In  some  old  Offices  for  the  first  Sunday 

in  Advent. 
St.  John's  Day.  St.  Greg.  Sacr.  and  Gothic  Liturg. 

The  Epiphany.  St.  Greg.  Sacr. 

1,2,  and  3  Sun.  after  Epiph.  The  same,  and  St.  Ambros   Lilurg. 


5  Epiphany. 

Septuagesiina. 

Sexagesima. 

2,  3,  4,  5  Sunday  in  Lent. 

G  Sunday  in  Lent. 


St.  Greg.  Sacr. 
The  same. 
The  same. 
The  same. 

1  lie  same;  but  in  St.  Ambro.s  Lilurg. 
for  Good  Friday. 
Good  Friday,  the  three  Col-  They  are  in  all  Offices  with  little  va- 


lects. 

Easter  Day. 

3  Sunday  after  Easter. 
5  Sunday  after  Easter. 
Ascension  Day. 
Whit  Sunday. 
1  Sunday  after  Trinity. 


riation  ;  but  are  left  out  of  the  Bre- 
viaries of  Pius  V.  and  Clem.  VIII. 

St.  Greg.  Sacr.  and  a  Collect  almost  the 
same  in  the  Gallic  Liturg. 

St.  Greg.  Sacr.,  St.  Ambros.  Liturg. 

St.  Greg.  Sacr. 

The  same. 

The  same. 

The  same.  This  in  some  old  Offices  ia 
called  the  second  after  Pentecost ;  in 
others  the  first  after  the  octaves  of 
Pentecost, 


388  APPENDIX. 

Collects  for  Whence  taken. 

The  3,  4, 5,  6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12,  Are  all  in  St.  Greg.  Sacr. 

13,  14, 15,  16, 17,  20,  21, 

22,  23,  24,  and  25  after 

Trinity. 
The  Purification.  The  same. 

St.  Michael's  Day-  The  same. 

The  reader  will  observe,  that  the  greater  part  of  this  class  of  Col- 
lects is  found  in  Gregory's  Sacramentary,  which  was  composed  be- 
fore the  year  600.  All  of  these,  therefore,  are,  at  least,  1200  years 
old,  and  many  of  them  are  much  older.  For  Gregory  did  not  origi- 
nally form  the  offices.  He  only  collected  and  improved  them.  To 
waive  all  other  proof 'of  this,  we  liave  his  own  testimony,  given  in 
vindication  of  his  conduct.  "  I  have  followed,"  says  he,  "  a  prac- 
tice common  in  the  Greek  Church,  and  have  altered  some  old  Col- 
lects, and  added  some  new  and  useful  ones."  But  the  generality 
of  the  Collects  in  his  Sacramentary  he  compiled  from  Liturgies, 
which,  in  his  time  were  esteemed  ancient. 

PART  II. 

Consisting  of  Collects  takenfrom  ancient  models,  but  considerably  altered 
and  improved  by  our  Reformers,  and  the  Rcvieivcrs  of  the  Liturgy. 

Collects  for  Time  of  Improvement.       Hoto  it  stood  before. 

St.  Slephen'.s  Day.        Beginning  add  1GG2.     Grant  us,  O  Lord,   to 

learn    to    love    our 
enemies,  &c. 
4  Sunday  aft.  Epiph.     End  improved  1C62.  Grant  lo  us  the  health 

of  body    and    soul, 
that  all  those  things 
which  we  suffer  for 
sin,  &c. 
4  Sunday  after  Eafit.     Imiiroved  1662.  Who  makest  the  minds 

of  all  faithful  people 
to  be  of  one  will,  &c. 


APPENDIX. 


380 


CoUeclsfor  Time  of  Ivi]>rovnncnl. 

Sund.  after  Asccii.         A  little  varied  154'J 


2  Sunday  af'tci  Trill.     Tlic  order  inverted 
16G2. 


8  Sunday  after  Trin.     Beginning  improved 

1662. 
11  Sunday  after  Trin.  Improved  1662. 


18  Sunday  after  Trin.  improved  1662. 

19  Sunday  after  Trin.  Improved  1662. 


St.  Paul's  Day. 


Improved  1559  and 
1662. 


How  il  stood  before. 

Tiiis  had  been  of  old 
the  Collect  for  Ascen- 
sion Day,  on  which 
our  venerable  Bede 
repeated  it  as  he  was 
dying. 

Lord  make  us  to  have 
a  perpetual  fear  and 
love  of  thy  holy 
name,  for  thou  never 
failest,  &c. 

Whose  providence  is 
never  deceived,  &c. 

That  we  running  to 
thy  promises  may  be 
made  partakers  of 
thy  heavenly  trea- 
sure, &c. 

To  avoid  the  infections 
of  the  devil,  &c. 

That  the  working  of 
thy  mercy  may  in  all 
things,  &c. 

In  the  Breviaries*  a 
new  prayer  was  add- 


*  Had  Dr.  Comber  said  Missal  instead  of  Breviary,  he  would  have  been  more 
correct .  For  llioiit'li  I'le  Collect  of  Uio  day  was  used  in  the  Breviary,  yet  it 
was  taken  from  the  Missal.  Thus,  in  our  Morning  Prayer,  the  rubric  directs 
that  the  first  Collect,  that  is,  the  Collect  of  the  day,  "  shall  be  the  same  thai 
is  appointed  at  the  Communion."  By  members  of  our  Church,  and  dissenters, 
the  Breviary,  Missil,  and  Ritual,  three  very  different  books,  arc  at  present 
generally  confounded.  The  Breviary  contains  matins,  lauds,  &.C.;  and  if  tl'e 
reader  considers  it  as  corresponding  with  our  daily  service,  he  will  not  form  a 
very  erroneous  opinion.  The  Missal  or  Mass  Book,  answers  to  "the  order  of  the 
adminUtntUon  of  the  Lord's  Supper,"  together  with  "  Collects,  Epistles,  and 
Gospels,  to  be  used  thoiighout  the  year."  The  Ritual  is  composed  of  occasion- 
al Offices,  namely,  Baptism,  Matrimony,  Visitation  of  the  Sick,  &c. 


390 


APPENDIX. 


Collects  for 


Time  of  Improvemenl. 


Tlie  Annunciation.        Improved  1549. 


St.  Philip  c^nd  James.  Improved  1662. 


St.  Bartholmew. 


Trinity  Sunday. 


Improved  1662. 


How  it  Hood  before. 
ed  mentioning  St. 
Paul's  intercession  ; 
in  the  year  1549  the 
old  prayer  alone  out 
of  Greg.  Sacr.  was 
restored,  which  had 
our  walking  after  his 
example  only,  which 
was  a  little  varied  in 
the  year  1662. 

The  Breviaries  had  put 
in  a  new  prayer 
about  the  B.  Virgin'.s 
intercession,  which 
was  cast  out  in  1549, 
and  the  form  being 
in  St.  Greg.  Sacr.  re- 
stored. 

As  thou  has  taught  St. 
Philip  and  the  other 
apostles,  &c. 

To  preach  that  which 
he  taught,  cSrc,  was 
altered, because  there 
is  no  writing  of  his 
extant. 

This  Collect  is  no  older 
than  the  Sacramenta- 
ry  ascribed  to  Alcui- 
nus.  The  old  Offices 
have  another  Collect 
for  it,  and  call  it  the 
Octave  of  Pentecost. 


APPENDIX. 


391 


PART  III. 

Consisliiig  of  such  Collects  as  are  composed  aiuio,  and  substituted  in  the 
place  of  those  tohich,  cotitaining  either  false  or  superstitious  doctrines, 
were  on  this  account  rejected. 


Collectsfor 

1  Sunday  in  Advent. 

'2  Sunday  in  Advent. 

3  Sunday  in  Advent. 

Christmas  Day. 

Circumcision. 

6  Sunday  after  Epipiiany. 

Q,uinquagesima. 
Ash  Wednesday. 
1  Sunday  in  Lent. 
Blaster  Even . 

Easter  Sunday. 

1  Sunday  after  Easter. 


2  Sunday  after  Easter. 

St.  Andrew's  Day. 

St.  Thomas's  Day. 

St.  Matthias. 

St.  Mark. 

St.  Barnabas. 

St.  John  Baptist. 

St.  Peter. 

St.  James. 

St.  Matthew. 

St.  Luke. 

St.  Simon  and  St.  Jude. 

All  Saints. 


Composed  in 

First  Book  of  Edward  VL  1549. 

The  same  time. 

1662. 

1549. 

The  same  time. 

1662.     Before  this  time  they  repeated 

the  Collect  for  the  fifth  Sunday. 
1549. 

The  same  time. 
The  same  time. 
1662.     No  Collect  for  it  ever  before 

then. 
The  first  sentence  (1  Cor.  v,  7,)  wa.<< 

added  1662. 
1549.      Then  it  was  used   on  Easter 

Tuesday,  and  in  16G2  was  fixed  for 

this  Sunday. 
1549. 
1552.     Second  Book  of  Ed  ward  VI. 


All  composed  anew  in  1549. 


392  APPENDIX. 

Yet,  in  the  composition  of  some  of  these  Collects,  the  compilers 
appear  to  have  had  an  eye  to  the  Missals  and  the  Breviaries.  They 
have  in  some  instances  preserved  the  introduction,  and  amplified  or 
given  a  different  turn  to  the  petitions. — Shepherd. 

No.  II. 

The  language  of  Hooker  on  the  Eucharist  has  been  contrasted 
by  Mr.  Keble  with  that  of  Jewel,  as  though  the  former  entertained 
a  higher  and  more  reverent  view  of  the  subject  than  the  latter.'  It 
is  somewhat  difficult  to  decide  upon  the  relative  reverence  of  what 
is  called  the  "  tone  of  language;"  and  therefore  wc  do  not  know  but 
Mr.  Keble  may  be  correct  in  representing  that  of  Hooker  to  be  far 
greater  than  that  of  Jewel.  We  venture  to  say,  however,  that  the 
views  of  Hooker  on  this  subject  did  not  differ  in  any  important 
point  from  those  of  his  friend  and  patron,  even  though  he  expounded 
the  sixth  chapter  of  St.  John  as  having  a  prospective  reference  to 
the  Eucharist,  and  though  it  were  granted  that  the  one  speaks  upon 
the  subject  "  in  tones  of  unaffected  reverence,"  and  the  other  "with 
peremptory  language,  almost  amounting  to  scorn(ulness." 

Let  it  be  remembered  that  Hooker  immediately  succeeded  that 
school  of  noble  Reformers  who,  wJiile  they  gave  up  their  lives  for  a 
testimony  against  the  doctrine  of  a  real  and  corporal  presence  in  the 
elements,  and  of  a  sacrifice  for  sin  in  the  celebration  of  the  Eucha- 
rist, yet  freely  spoke  of  signs  and  symbols  as  if  they  were  what 
they  represented.  Let  it  be  remembered,  also,  that  his  familiarity 
with  the  fathers  of  the  early  church,  with  whom  this  practice  was 
habitual,  had  made  the  use  of  language  which  startles  one  who 
views  the  Eucharistic  controversy  only  in  the  light  of  modern 
times,  a  mental  habit  which  he  felt  no  necessity  of  correcting.  If 
these  facts  be  borne  in  mind,  the  reader  will  not  be  surprised  to  find 
jn  Hooker,  as  he  has  in  Cranmer  and  Ridley  and  Jewel,  distinct 
and  repeated  assertions  of  the  presence  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist, 
and  of  the  participation,  on  the  part  of  the  communicant,  of  the 
real  body  and  blood  of  Christ.     But  with  these  assertions  he  will 

1  Keble's  Hooker,  Introduction,  p  43. 


APPENDIX. 


393 


always  find  explanations  which  distinctly  disavow  any  other  pre- 
sence than  a  sacramental  one,  or  a  spiritual  presence  of  Christ  to 
the  heart;  any  other  feeding  upon  the  body  and  blood  of  the  cruci- 
fied Redeemer,  than  that  of  faith  which  lays  hold  of  his  death,  as 
redemption  and  righteousness  and  life. 

The  entire  view  of  Hooker  on  this  subject  may  be  summed  up  in 
the  three  following  propositions: 

1.  There  is  no  presence  of  Christ's  actual  body  and  blood  in  the 
elements. 

2.  The  presence  of  Christ  is  a  presence  of  his  spirit  in  the*heart 
of  the  believer. 

3.  The  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  is  an  instrument  whereby  the 
faithful  recipient  has  communion  or  fellowship  with  the  person  of 
Christ  as  God  and  man,  and  is  made  a  partaker  of  the  grace  and 
efficacy  of  his  body  and  blood,  wliereby  there  is  a  true  change,  both 
of  soul  and  body,  an  alteration  from  death  to  life.- 

These  three  propositions  exhaust  the  meaning  of  Hooker's  lein- 
guage  on  this  subject.  From  the  passages  which  follow,  we  shall 
be  abled  istinctly  to  gather  the  first  two  of  these  propositions,  as  well 
as  to  ascertain  in  what  sense  the  Eucharist  is  spoken  of  as  an  in- 
strument, and  what  is  meant  by  the  communion  and  fellowship  ©f 
the  person  of  Christ. 

I.  The  first  proposition  is  involved  in  his  statement  of  the  point 
at  issue. 

"  Whereby  the  question  is  driven  to  a  narrower  issue,  nor  doth 
any  thing  rest  doubtful  but  this,  whether,  when  the  Sacrament  is 
administered,  Christ  be  whole  within  man  only,  or  else  his  body  and 
blood  be  also  externally  seated  in  the  very  consecrated  elements 
themselves;  which  opinion  they  th^t  defend  are  driven  either  to 
consubslantiate,  and  incorporate  Christ  with  elements  sacramental, 
or  to  transubslantiale,  And  change  their  substance  into  his ;  and  so 
the  one  to  hold  him  really  but  invisibly  moulded  up  with  the  sub- 
stance of  those  element.-^,  the  other  to  hide  him  under  the  only  visible 
show  of  bread  and  wine,  the  substance  whereof,  as  they  imagine, 
is  abolished,  his  succeeded  in  the  same  room."^ 

2  Hooker's  Works,  vol.  i,  p.  453.  3  Hooker's  Works,  vol.  i,  p.  449. 

17* 


394  APPENDIX. 

In  the  following  passages  the  first  proposition  is  clearly  and  dis- 
tinctly expressed: 

"  The  real  presence  of  Christ's  most  blessed  body  and  blood  is 
not,  therefore,  to  be  sought  for  in  the  Sacrametit,  but  in  the  worthy  re- 
ceiver of  the  Sacrament.'"* 

"  There  is  no  sentence  of  Holy  Scripture  which  eaith  we  cannot 
by  this  Sacrament  be  made  partakers  of  his  body  and  blood,  except 
they  be  first  contained  in  the  Sacrmnent,  or  the  Sacrament  converted  into 
them."  ^ 

"  Now,  whereas  all  three  opinions  [the  Roman,  Lutheran,  and 
Sacramentarian]  do  thus  far  accord  in  one,  that  strong  conceit  which 
two  of  the  three  have  embraced,  as  teaching  a  literal,  corporal,  and 
oral  manducation  of  the  very  substance  of  his  flesh  and  blood,  is 
surely  an  opinion  no  where  delivered  in  Holy  Scripture,  whereby  they 
should  think  themselves  bound  to  believe  it,  and  (to  speak  with  the 
softest  terms  we  can  use)  greatly  prejudiced  in  that,  when  some 
others  did  so  conceive  of  eating  his  flesh,  our  Saviour,  to  abate  that 
error  in  them,  gave  them  directly  to  understand  how  his  flesh  so 
eaten  could  profit  them  nothing,  because  the  words  which  he  spake 
were  spirit;  that  is  to  say,  they  had  reference  to  a  mystical  panici- 
palion,  which  mystical  participation  giveth  life.'"' 

II.  That  the  real  presence  of  Christ  is  a  presence  by  his  Spirit  to 
or  in  the  heart  of  the  believer,  is  distinctly  affirmed  in  the  second  of 
the  passages  above  quoted.  It  is  also  as  unequivocally  declared  in 
the  following  words : 

"  I  see  not  which  way  it  should  be  gathered  by  the  words  of 
Christ  when"  and  where  the  bread  is  his  body  and  the  cup  his  blood, 
hut  only  in  the  very  heart  and  soul  of  him  ivhich  receiveth  them.'''' ' 

III.  The  third  position,  that  the  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  in  an 
instrument  whereby  the  faithful  recipient  has  communion  or  fellnw- 
ship  with  the  person  of  Christ,  as  God  and  man,  and  is  made  n 
partaker  of  the  grace  and  eflicacy  of  his  body  and  blood,  is  our: 
which  requires  a  fuller  development. 

The  substance  of  this  proposition  is  stated  by  Hooker  in  various 

4  Hooker,  vol.  i,  p.  45J .  5  Id.,  p.  451. 

6  Id.,  p.  452.  7Id.,  p.  451. 


APPENDIX.  395 

forms.  Sometimes  he  speaks  of  the  mysteries  as  "  conduits  of  life 
and  conveyances  of  his  body  and  blood  unto  them."  *  Sometimes  he 
speaks  of  "  a  real  participation  of  Christ,  and  of  life  in  his  body  and 
blood  6j/ means  of  this  Sacrament.''''^  Again,  he  declares  that  "the 
bread  and  cup  are  his  body  and  blood,  because  they  are  causes  in- 
strumental upon  the  receipt  whereof  the  participation  of  his  body  and 
blood  ensueth." '"  In  all  these  different  expressions  the  one  idea 
reigns,  that  the  Eucharist  is  an  instrument  whereby  the  body  and 
Mood  of  Christ  is  conveyed  to  the  believer.  That  body  and  blood 
are  not  in,  with,  or  under  the  elements,  (as  he  repeatedly  declares,) 
but  they  are  conveyed  to  the  believer  in  the  due  celebration  and  re- 
ception of  the  Eucharist.  Now,  the  point  before  us  is,  "  What  is 
the  meaning  of  this  proposition  ?  What  thought  does  he  mean  to 
convey  by  these  words?" 

Our  attention  is  directed  to  the  two  questions  :  "  In  what  sense 
does  Hooker  speak  of  the  Euchai'ist  as  an  instntment  of  conveying 
the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  to  the  faithful  communicant.'  and  what 
is  meant  by  this  conveyance  of  the  Saviour's  body  and  blood.'" 

To  arrive  at  a  clear  and  full  resolution  of  the  first  of  these  ques- 
tions, some  preliminary  observations  £ue  necessary. 

It  will  be  seen  that  by  the  term  "  conveyance  of  Christ's  body 
and  blood"  in  the  Eucharist,  the  meaning  of  Hooker  is,  that  we  are 
made  partakers  of  the  benefits  of  his  death  and  passion — that  we 
are  justified  and  accepted,  and  are  made  to  receive  the  sanctifying 
gifts  of  the  Spirit.  In  short,  in  the  language  of  our  Communion 
Service,  we  receive  the  "  forgiveness  of  our  sins  and  all  other  bene- 
fits of  his  passion."  This  position  we  take  for  granted  for  the 
present.  If  not  subsequently  proved,  all  arguments  which  may  be 
based  upon  it  will,  of  course,  be  nullified. 

Now  when  Hooker  speaks  of  the  Eucharist  as  an  instrument  of 
conveying  the  benefits  of  Christ's  crucified  body  to  the  soul,  namely, 
justification  and  the  gifts  of  the  Spirit,  he  does  not  intend  that  these 
blessings  ave  first  obtained  through  the  instrumentality  of  this  Sacra- 
ment. That  oflice  he  assigns,  with  a  constant  and  consistent  uni- 
formity, to  faith.    The  following  passage  is  the  more  striking  in  its 


8  Hooker,  vol.  i,  p.  452.  9  Id.,  p.  451.  10  Id  ,  p.  459. 


396  APPENDIX. 

testimony  on  tliis  point,  because  it  is  introductory  to  a  discussion 
upon  the  grace  of  the  Sacraments. 

"  The  general  cause  which  hath  procured  our  remission  of  sins  is 
the  blood  of  Christ;  therefore  in  his  blood  we  are  justified,  that  is 
to  say,  cleared  and  acquitted  of  all  sin.  The  condition  required  in 
us  for  our  personal  qualification  hereunto  isfailh.  Sin,  both  origina 
and  actual,  committed  before  belief  in  the  promise  of  salvation  through 
Jesus  Christ,  is,  through  the  mere  mercy  of  God,  taken  aioay  from 
themwhich  believe;  justified  they  are,  and  that  not  in  reward  of  their 
good,  but  through  the  pardon  of  their  evil  works.  For,  albeit  they 
have  disobeyed  God,  yet  our  Saviour's  death  and  obedience,  per- 
formed in  their  belief,  doth  redound  to  them  ;  hy  believing  it  they 
make  the  benefit  thereof  to  become  their  own."  " 

The  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist,  then,  is  not  regarded  by  Hooker 
as  the  instrument  or  means  by  which  we  first  obtain  the  benefits  of 
Christ's  passion.  It  is  not,  then,  the  one  or  the  primary  instrument 
of  the  blessing  specified.  It  is  an  instrument.  Let  this  point  be 
borne  in  mind. 

Now  let  us  sec  in  what  sense  he  regards  the  Eucharist  as  an  in- 
strument of  conveying  what  he  calls  sometimes  the  body  and  blood 
of  Chri.st,  and  sometimes  the  participation  of  Christ  and  of  life. 
His  views  upon  the  nature  and  office  of  the  Sacraments  generally, 
will  show  his  opinion  upon  this  point.  Freely  as  he  speaks  of  tUe 
SacramenUs  as  the  means  or  instruments  of  grace,  he  uses  the  word 
instrument  in  a  very  general  sense,  not  as  that  through  which  the  grace 
's given,  but  that  along  with  which,  rightly  administered  and  receiv- 
ed, it  is  imparted  directly  from  God.  The  distinction  may  at  first 
seem  slight  and  unimportant;  but  it  is  one  which  Hooker  is  very 
careful  to  observe,  and  on  which  depend  important  developments  of 
doctrine.  If  it  be  a  straw,  it  is  one  which  lies  at  the  springhead  of 
divine  truth,  and  separates  the  fountain  into  two  parts,  whose  on- 
flowings  swell,  the  one  into  the  turbid  and  noxious  stream  of  Ro- 
mish error,  and  the  other  into  the  clear,  salutary,  and  abounding 
river  of  pure  doctrine. 
Two  passages  already  quoted,  have  a  direct  testimony  on  this  point. 

11  Hooker's  Works,  vol,  ii,  p.  36. 


APPENDIX.  397 

In  one,  (page  229,)  "  it  is  declared  that  Saoranicnts  contain,  in  tliem- 
aelves,  no  vital  force  or  efficacy;  they  are  not  physical  but  ynoral  in- 
struments of  salvation."  In  the  other,  (page  952,)  after  an  illustra- 
tion which  itself  proves  that  the  grace  is  not  imparted  through  the 
Sacrament,  as  an  instrument,  but  along  with  it,  he  concludes  in  lan- 
guage which  expressly  asserts  that  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  illus- 
tration :  "He  that  giveth  these  preeminences,  declareth  by  such 
signs  his  meaning,  nor  doth  the  receiver  take  the  same  but  with 
effect ;  for  which  cause  he  is  said  to  have  the  one  by  the  other  ;  albeit 
that  ichick  is  bestowed  proceedelh  wholly  from  the  ivill  of  the  giver  and 
not  from  the  efficacy  of  tlie  sign." 

In  all  his  language  on  the  subject  of  the  Sacraments  he  is  careful 
to  maintain  this  point.  What  can  be  clearer  than  this  passage? 
"  For  so  God  hath  instituted  and  ordained  that  together  loith  due 
administration  and  receipt  of  Sacramental  signs,  thei-e  shall  proceed 
from  himself  grace  effectual  to  sanctify,  to  cure,  to  comfort,  and  what- 
soever else  is  good  for  the  souls  of  men."  '■' 

Again  ;  Sacraments  are  described  by  Hooker  as  marks  loherehy  to 
know  when  God  imparts  grace,  and  means  conditional  required  by 
God  of  those  to  whom  he  imparts  it.  "  But  their  chiefest  force  and 
virtue  consisteth  not  herein  so  much,  as  that  they  are  heavenly- 
ceremonies,  which  God  hath  sanctified  and  ordained  to  be  adminis- 
tered in  his  Church,  first,  as  marks  whereby  to  know  when  God  doth 
imparl  the  vital  or  saving  grace  of  Christ  unto  all  that  are  capable 
thereof;  and,  secondly,  as  means  conditional  ichich  God  requireth  in 
them  to  ichom  he  imparteth  grace."" '^  Here  they  are  described  as 
marks  to  know  when  God  imparts  grace.  This  is  one  of  their 
chai-acteristics.  Another  is,  that  they  are  means,  not  instrumental, 
but  conditional,  on  the  right  use  of  which,  God  imparts  grace,  di- 
rectly from  himself,  to  the  heart  of  the  receiver.  The  passage  fur- 
nishes a  key  by  which  to  understand  other  passages  in  which  the 
Sacraments  are  called  instruments  of  grace. 

Once  more ;  As  for  the  Sacraments,  ihey  really  exhibit,  but  for 
aught  we  can  gather  out  of  that  which  is  written  of  them,  they  are 
not  really  nor  do  really  contain  in  themselves  that  grace,  which,  wUh 

13  Hooker,  vol.  ii,  p.  108.  13  Id  ,  vol.  I,  p.  406. 


398  APPENDIX. 

them,  or  by  timn,  it  pleaseth  God  to  bestow."  '''  Here  it  is  plain  he 
does  not  regard  Sacraments  as  the  proximate  instrument  through 
which,  but  as  the  means  condUional  along  ivith,  or  by  which,  he  bestows 
grace  and  life. 

A  few  more  passages  on  the  Sacraments  generally  will  give  us  the 
complete  views  which  he  entertained  on  this  branch  of  the  subject. 
He  calls  them  signs  and  pledges;  signs  and  pledges,  not  of  a  former 
benefit,  but  of  a  present  one  ;  not  bare  signs  of  instruction  or  admo- 
nition, but  seals  of  a  real  and  present  blessing.  Nor  are  they  signs 
only.  Tliey  are  means  or  instruments,  in  the  sense  (as  we  have 
seen)  of  being  conditions,  on  the  right  use  of  which  CTod  bestows 
his  grace  upon  the  faithful  recipient. 

"Let  it,  tlierefore,  suffice  us  to  receive  Sacraments  as  sure  pledges 
of  God's  favor,  signs  infallible,  that  the  hand  of  his  saving  mercy 
doth  thereby  reach  forth  itself  towards  us,  sending  the  influence  of 
his  Spirit  into  men's  hearts,  which  makelh  them  like  to  a  rich  soil, 
fertile  with  all  kind  of  heavenly  virtues,"  &c.'^ 

"  We  take  not  Baptism  nor  the  Eucharist  for  bare  resemblances 
or  memorials  of  thhigs  absent,  neither  for  naked  signs  and  testimo- 
nies assuring  us  of  grace  received  before,  but  (as  they  are  in  deed 
and  in  verity)  for  means  effectual  whereby  God,  when  we  take  the 
Sacraments,  delivereth  into  our  hands  that  grace  available  unto  eter- 
nal life,  which  grace  the  Sacraments  represent  or  signify."  '^  Here 
the  Sacraments  "are  declared  to  represent  or  signify  grace.  When 
we  take  them,  God  delivereth  into  our  hands  the  grace  they  signify. 
In  such  sense,  and  in  such  only,  they  are  means  or  instruments  of 
grace. 

The  passage  which  immediately  succeeds  tlie  above  is  still  more 
expressly  to  the  purpose.  "  If,  on  all  sides,  it  be  confessed  that  the 
grace  of  Baptism  is  poured  into  the  soul  of  man,  that  by  water  we 
receive  it,  although  it  be  neither  sealed  in  the  water  nor  the  water 
changed  into  it,  what  should  induce  men  to  think  that  the  grace  of 
the  Eucharist  must  needs  be  in  the  Eucharist  before  it  can  be  in  us  that 
receive  it?" 

Now,  by  gathering  together  all  these  testimonies,  we  have  a  clear, 

14  Id.,  p.  401 .  15  Hook«r ,  vol  ii,  p.  37,         16  Id.,  vol.  i,  p.  407. 


APPENDIX.  S99 

consistent,  intelligible  system  of  doctrine  on  this  subject,  by  which 
we  may  understand  and  harmonize  all  those  statements  of  Hooker 
which  seem  to  regard  the  Sacraments  as  sometimes  only  signs  and 
Sometimes  as  instruments  of  grace.  It  may  be  stated  in  few  words. 
The  virtue  and  efficacy  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ — that  is, 
pardon  and  sanctification  through  his  atoning  sacrifice — are  first  ap- 
plied to  the  soul  of  the  individual  on  the  exercise  of  a  living  faith. 
Sacraments  are  signs  of  the  grace  and  blessings  of  redemption 
through  Christ's  blood.  They  are  not  only  signs,  but  they  are  seal.s 
of  real  and  present  blessings.  They  are  not  only  signs  and  seals  of 
present  blessings,  but  they  are  means,  conditional,  by  the  use  of 
which  those  blessings  are  renewed  at  the  time  in  which  the  Sacra- 
ments are  rightly  received. 

Having  thus  ascertained  the  meaning  of  Hooker  when  he  speaks 
of  the  Sacrament  as  an  instrinnent  of  conveying  the  body  and  blood 
of  Christ  to  the  believer,  let  us  now  consider  what  he  means  by  the 
conveyance  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ. 

We  have  seen  that  Hooker  uses,  as  perfectly  synonymous  with 
the  expression,  "  the  conveyance  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ," 
other  language  whose  meaning  cannot  be  misunderstood.  He  speaks 
of  the  effect  of  the  Eucharist  as  "a  participation  of  his  body  and 
blood;"  a  real  participation  of  Christ  and  of  life."  Wc  have  seen,  also, 
that  he  rejects  the  notion  of  a  bodily  presence  in  the  Eucharist,  and 
allows  only  a  .spiritual  presence  of  Christ  in  the  soul.  These  premi- 
.ses  were  sufficient  to  prove  that,  when  he  speaks  of  the  conveyance  of 
Christ's  body  and  blood,  he  cannot,  by  this  language,  intend  any 
meaning  contrary  to  the  first  two  positions,  and  these  exclude  all 
corporal  presence  in  the  elements  or  in  the  soul.  Yet  we  adduce 
his  direct  testimony,  that  it  may  be  seen  that  his  own  mind  fell  into 
no  contradictions  on  this  perplexing  subject. 

The  instrument  of  union  with  Christ  is  described  by  Hooker  to 
be  faith.  By  it  we  are  justified,  and  by  it  we  receive  supplies  of 
.•spiritual  life.  By  it  a  living  union  with  him  is  begun,  and  by  it  this 
^nion  is  continued.  The  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  is  a  sign  and 
instrument  (in  the  sense  before  described^  of  this  union  and  life, 
through  the  death  and  sacrifice  of  Christ.  The  passages  which  fol- 
low express  this  doctrine,  and  no  more. 


400  APPENDIX. 

If  lu)  other  proof  of  this  position  were  to  be  found  than  that  which 
is  contained  in  his  defence  of  the  Sacramentaries,  that  would  be 
quite  sufficient.  They  surely  were  never  accused  of  holding  to  a 
real  and  corpora!  communication  of  Christ's  body  and  blood  to  the 
communicant.  Yet  Hooker  defends  and  identifies  himself  with  their 
view  of  the  subject. 

"  It  seemeth,  therefore,  much  amiss  that  against  them  whom  they 
'■erm  Sacramentaries  so  many  invective  discourses  are  made,  all 
running  upon  two  points,  that  the  Eucharist  is  not  a  bare  sign  or 
figure  only,  and  that  the  efficacy  of  his  body  and  blood  is  not  all 
that  we  receive  in  this  Sacrament.  For  no  man  having  read  their 
books  and  writings,  which  are  thus  traduced,  can  be  ignorant  that 
both  these  assertions  they  plainly  confess  to  be  most  true.  They 
do  not  so  interpret  the  words  of  Christ  as  if  the  name  of  his  body 
did  import  but  the  figure  of  his  laody,  and  to  be,  were  only  to  sig- 
nify his  blood.  They  grant  that  these  holy  mysteries,  received  in 
due  manner,  do  instrumentally  both  make  us  partakers  of  the  grace 
of  that  body  and  blood  which  were  given  for  the  life  of  the  world, 
and  besides,  also,  impart  unto  us,  even  in  true  and  real,  though 
mystical  manner,  the  very  person  of  our  Lord  himself,  whole,  per- 
fect, and  entire,  as  hath  been  shown.'"" 

The  idea  of  the  union  with  Christ,  and  the  life  resulting  from  it, 
here  expressed,  is  very  different  from  that  of  the  Roman  and  Trac- 
tarian  writers.  The  latter  contemplates  a  literal  reception  of  the 
real  body  of  Christ,  by  which  the  body  obtains  the  prin- 
ciple of  immortality,  and  the  soul  receives  a  grace  special  to  thi.s 
Sacrament.  The  former  regards  us  as  made  partakers  of  the  grace 
of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Redeemer,  and  as  receiving  in  a  real 
though  mystical  manner  the  very  person  of  our  Lord. 

But  let  the  pa.ssage.s  which  follow  give  the  full  sense  of  Hooicer 
on  this  point.  First,  let  us  hear  his  description  of  the  union  of  the 
believer  with  Christ. 

"Our  souls  and  bodies,  quickened  to  eternal  life,  are  effects,  the 
cause  whereof  is  the  person  of  Christ;  his  body  and  blood  are  the 
true  well-spring  out  of  which  this  life  floweth.   So  that  his  body  and 

17  Hooker,  vol.  i,  p.  452 


APPENDIX.  401 

blood  are  ni  tliat  very  subject  wherein  they  minister  iiCc,  not  only 
by  cft'ect  or  operation,  even  as  the  influence  of  the  heavens  is  in 
plants,  beasts,  men,  and  in  everything  which  they  quicken,  but  also 
by  a  far  more  divine  and  mystical  kind  of  union,  which  niakcth  us 
one  with  him,  even  as  he  and  the  Father  are  one.'"*^ 

The  life  imparted  from  Christ  is  not  the  effect  of  the  influence  of 
an  absent  and  distant  cause,  like  that  of  the  sun  on  plants,  but  it 
arises  from  a  vital  participation  and  union  of  his  natux-e  with  ours. 
The  meaning  of  Hooker  may  be  illustrated  by  reference  to  the  na- 
ture of  our  union  and  communion  with  the  first  man,  Adam.  As 
partakers  of  his  nature,  wc  derive  from  him  disease,  sin,  and  death. 
l>y  virtue  of  our  union  with  Christ — who  now  stands  at  the  hcail  of 
redeemed  human  nature,  imparting  a  new  influence  to  ail  wlio  are 
in  union  with  him  by  living  faith — we  derive  from  him  life,  grace, 
and  immortality.  As  by  the  first  Adam  we  die,  by  the  second 
Adam  we  are  made  alive.  *'  His  body  and  blood  are  the  true  well- 
spring,  out  of  which  this  life  floweth." 

This  mystical  union,  and  the  life  which  it  gives,  which  wc  obtain 
through  faith,  is  enjf)yed  and  confirmed  in  the  Eucharist,  as  an  instru- 
ment of  the  blessing  which  it  at  the  same  time  signifies  and  gives  in 
fullermeasure.  The  following  [)assage  is  a  summary  of  Hooker's  view 
of  all  the  benefits  of  the  Sacrament.  It  will  be  noticed  that,  hi  the 
conclusion  of  the  passag6-,he  is  careful  to  show  the  peculiar  sense  in 
which  he  speaks  of  the  Eucharist  as  an  instrument  for  the  convey- 
ance of  these  blessings  : 

"  It  is  on  all  sides  plainly  confessed,  first,  that  this  Sacrament  is 
a  true  and  i-eal  participation  of  Christ,  who  (hereby  impartcth  him- 
self, his  whole  entire  person,  ,is  a  imjstical  head  unto  every  soid  that  re- 
ceiveth  him,  and  that  every  such  receiver  doth  thereby  incorporate 
or  unite  himself  unto  Christ  as  o  mystical  member  of  him,  yea,  of 
them,  also,  whom  he  acknowledgcth  to  be  his  own  ;  secondly,  that 
to  whom  the  person  of  Christ  is  thus  communicated  to  them  he 
giveth,  by  the  same  Sacrament,  his  Holy  Spirit  to  sanctify  them  as 
itsanctifieth  him  which  is  their  headj  thirdly,  that  what  merit,  force, 
or  virtue  soever,  there  is  in  his  sacrificed  body  and  blood,  we  freely, 

18  Id.,  p.  450. 


402  APPENDIX. 

fully,  and  wholly  have  it  by  this  Sacrament;  fourthly,  that  the  effect 
thereof  in  us  is  u  real  transmutation  of  our  souls  and  bodies,  from  sin  to 
righteousness,  from  death  to  life  ;  fifthly,  that  because  the  Sacrament 
being  of  itself  but  a  corruptible  and  earthly  creature,  must  needs  be 
thought  an  unlikely  instrument  to  work  so  admirable  effects  in  man, 
we  are,  therefore,  to  rest  ourselves  altogether  on  the  strength  of  his  glorious 
power,  who  is  able  and  will  bring  to  pass  that  the  bread  and  cup 
which  he  giveth  us  shall  be  truly  the  thing  he  promiseth."  "* 

After  dissuading  men  from  attaching  too  much  importance  to  the 
question,  Where  is  Christ?  he  plainly  shows  that  he  does  not  re- 
gard his  bodily  presence  to  be  in  the  elements  or  in  the  recipient,  or 
anywhere  but  in  heaven. 

"  In  a  word,  it  appeareth  not  that  of  all  the  ancient  fathers  of  the 
Church,  any  one  did  ever  conceive  or  imagine,  other  than  only  amys- 
tical  participation  of  Chrisfs  body  and  blood  in  the  Sacrament,  neither 
are  their  speeches,  concerning  the  change  of  the  elements  themselves 
into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  such  that  a  man  can  thereby  in 
conscience  assure  himself  it  was  their  meaning  to  persuade  the 
world,  either  of  a  corporal  consubstantiation  of  Christ  with  those 
sanctified  and  blessed  elements  before  we  receive  them,  or  the  like 
transubstantiation  of  them  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ." 

We  think  our  position  is  established,  that  the  entire  view  of 
Hooker  on  the  subject  of  the  Eucharist  may  be  summed  up  in  three 
propositions,  announced  at  the  beginning  of  this  discussion. 

The  only  seeming  diflerence  which  we  have  been  able  to  discover, 
between  the  view  of  Hooker  and  that  of  Jewel,  has  reference  to  tlie 
benefits  or  fruits  of  the  Eucharist.  Jewel,  in  common  with  Cran- 
mer,  spoke  of  the  right  reception  of  the  Eucharist  as  conveying  pre- 
cisely the  same  blessings  as  were  conveyed  in  the  right  reception  of 
Baptism  and  tlie  faithful  hearing  of  the  Word.  Hooker  distin- 
guishes between  the  grace  of  Baptism  and  that  of  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per. The  difference,  however,  is  more  seeming  than  real.  The 
one  contemplates  salvation  as  a  whole,  and  speaks  of  it  as  signed  and 
sealed  and  given,  alike  by  the  Word,  by  Baptism,  and  by  the  Lord's 
Supper.     The  other,  with  more  theological  accuracy,  contemplates 

19  Hooker,  vol.  i,  p.  452. 


APPENDIX.  403 

the  various  blessings  included  in  salvation,  and  speaks  of  some  as 
more  particularly  connected  with  the  one  or  the  other  Sacrament. 
When,  however,  Hooker  speaks  of  a  salvation  as  a  whole,  he  uses 
Icinguage  which  is  very  similar  to  that  of  Jewel.  All  that  Jewel  meant 
by  his  expressions  on  this  point,  is  that  we  receive  Christ  both  in  Bap- 
tism and  in  the  Eucliarist.  So  much  Hooker  asserts  in  the  following 
passage.  But  beyond  this  general  assertion,  Hooker  proceeds, 
also,  to  show  how  we  receive  Christ  in  the  one  Sacrament  and  how 
in  the  other. 

"  We  receive  Christ  Jesus  in  Baptism  once  as  the  first  beginner, 
in  the  Eucharist  often,  as  being,  by  continual  degrees,  the  finisher  of 
our  life.  By  Baptism,  therefore,  toe  receive  Christ  Jesus,  and  from 
him  that  saving  grace  which  is  proper  unto  Baptism.  By  the  other 
Sacrament  rce  i-eceire  him,  also,  imparting  therein  himself  and  that 
grace  wliicii  the  Eucharist  properly  bestoweth.  So  that  each  Sacra- 
ment, having  both  thai  ivhich  isgeneral  or  common,  and  that  also  which 
is  jieculiar  unto  itself,  we  may  hereby  gather  that  the  participation 
of  Christ,  which  properly  belongeth  to  anyone  Sacrament,  is  not 
otherwise  to  be  obtained,  but  by  the  Sacrament  whereunto  it  is 
proper."^" 

We  have  dwelt  so  long  upon  the  views  of  Hooker,  on  this  subject, 
because  we  conceive  that  they  have  been  misrepresented  in  that 
edition  "-'  of  his  works  which  will  be  most  likely  to  fall  into  the  hands 
of  readers  in  this  country  ;  because  a  Slight  examination  of  language 
so  different  from  our  own,  and  so  usual  in  the  time  of  Hooker, 
might  not  enable  the  casual  reader  to  detect  the  misrepresentation; 
and  because,  above  all,  of  the  justly  high  authority  of  Hooker  on 
all  subjects  relating  to  the  constitution  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  As 
we  study  his  pages,  we  feel  that  the  term  'judicious,'  honorable 
and  well  merited  as  it  is,  falls  far  below  the  deserts  of  one,  who  con- 
ducted controversy  in  the  spirit  of  calm  and  heavenly  meditation; 
and  whose  mind,  amid  the  strong  and  conflicting  and  foaming  tides 
of  opinion,  which  tossed  and  carried  far  off,  amid  shoals  and  rocks, 
many  noble  barks,  freighted  with  the  treasures  of  piety  and  learn- 
ing, rested  on  the  waters  like  a  buoy,  with  its  chain  fastened  to  the 

20  Hooker,  vol.  i,  p.  407.  21  Kcble's. 


404  APPENDIX. 

rock,  lo  mark  the  narrow  channel  of  truth  and  safety.  The  remark 
of  Coleridge,  so  just  and  striking  in  its  application  to  the  saintly 
Leigliton,  of  whom  it  was  spoken,  seems  to  my  mind  yet  more  ap- 
propriately applicable  to  Hooker.  "  If  we  could  conceive  a  region 
of  intellect  between  reason  and  revelation  to  have  been  previously 
unoccupied,  we  might  say  that  he  had  taken  possession  of  that 
region." -- 

No.  III. 

The  Oblation  ant!  Invocation  have  been  proved,  in  our  chapter  on 
the  Lord's  Supjicr,  to  be  in  themselves  unobjectionable.  Yet  they 
have  been  adduced  as  evidence  of  a  recognition  by  our  Church  of  a 
sacrifice  other  than  that  of  praise  and  th.unksgiving.  The  testimony 
of  Bishop  White  on  the  subject  is  valuable,  as  proving  the  sense  in 
which  he  consented  to  the  admission  of  the  service. 

"  In  tiie  service  for  the  administration  of  the  Communion,  it  may 
perhaps  be  exjiected  that  the  great  change  made  in  restoring  to  the 
Consecration  Prayer  the  oblatory  words  and  the  invocation  of  the 
Holy  Spu'it,  left  out  in  King  Edward's  reign,  must  at  least  have 
produced  an  opposition.  But  no  such  thing  happened  to  any  con- 
siderable extent ;  or,  at  least,  the  author  did  not  hear  of  any  in  the 
other  house,  further  than  a  disposition  to  the  effect  in  a  few  gentle- 
men, which  was  counteracted  by  some  pertinent  remarks  of  the 
president.  In  that  of  the  Bishops,  it  lay  very  near  to  the  heart  of 
Bishop  Seabury.  As  for  the  other  Bishop,  without  conceiving  with 
some  that  the  service,  as  it  stood,  was  essentially  defective,  he  al- 
ways thought  there  was  a  beauty  in  those  ancient  forms,  and  can 
discover  no  superstition  in  them.  If,  indeed,  they  could  have  been 
reasonably  thought  to  imply  that  a  Christian  Minister  is  a  Priest, 
in  the  sense  of  an  offerer  of  sacrifice,  and  that  the  table  is  an  altar 
and  the  elements  a  sacrifice,  in  any  other  than  figurative  senses,  he 
would  have  zealously  opposed  the  admission  of  such  unevangelical 
sentiments  as  he  conceives  them  to  be.  The  English  Reformers 
carefully  exploded  every  thing  of  this  sort  at  the  time  of  their  issuing 
of  the  first  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  which  contained  the  Oblation 

22  Christian  Observer,  for  May,  1845,  p.  260. 


APPENDIX. 


405 


and  the  Invocation.  Although  they  were  left  out  on  a  subsequent 
review,  yet  it  is  known  to  have  been  done  at  the  instance  of  two 
learned  foreigners,  and  in  order  to  avoid  what  was  thought  the  ap- 
pearance of  encouragement  of  the  superstition  which  had  been  done 
away.  The  restoring  of  those  parts  of  the  service  by  the  American 
Church  has  been  since  objected  to  by  some  few  among  us.  To 
show  that  a  superstitious  sense  must  have  been  intended,  they  have 
laid  great  stress  on  the  printing  of  the  words,  '  which  we  now  offer 
unto  thee,'  in  a  different  character  from  the  rest  of  the  prayers.  But 
this  was  mere  accident.  The  Bisiiops,  being  possessed  of  the  form 
used  in  the  Scotch  Episcopal  Church,  which  they  had  altered  in 
some  respects,  referred  to  it  to  save  the  trouble  of  copying.  But  the 
reference  was  not  intended  to  establish  any  particular  manner  of 
printing;  and,  accordingly,  in  all  the  editions  of  the  Prayer-Book 
since  the  first,  the  aforesaid  words  have  been  printed  in  the  same 
character  with  the  rest  of  the  prayer,  without  any  deviation  from 
the  original  appointment.  Bishop  Seabury's  attachment  to  these 
changes  may  be  learned  from  tlie  following  incident.  On  the  morn- 
ing of  the  Sunday  which  occurred  during  the  session  of  the  Conven- 
tion, the  author  wished  him  to  consecrate  the  elements.  This  he 
declined.  On  the  offer  being  again  made  at  the  time  when  the 
service  was  to  begin,  he  still  declined  ;  and  smiling,  added — ^To  con- 
fess the  truth,  I  hardly  consider  the  form  to  be  used  as  strictly 
amounting  to  a  consecration.  The  form  was  of  course  that  used 
heretofore,  the  changes  not  having  taken  effect.  These  sentiments 
he  had  adopted  in  his  visit  to  the  Bishops  from  whom  he  received 
his  Episcopacy."  *•* 

In  this  passage  it  appears  that  Bishop  White  would  have  opposed 
their  introduction,  had  he  conceived  that  they  could  have  been 
thought  to  imply  that  a  Christian  Minister  is  a  Priest,  in  the  sense 
of  an  offerer  of  sacrifice,  and  that  the  table  is  an  altar,  and  the  ele- 
ments a  sacrifice,  in  any  other  than  figurative  sen.scs.  All  that  here 
appears  of  Bishop  Seabury's  view  of  the  subject  is,  that  he  consid- 
ered the  form  necessary  to  a  strict  consecriUivn.  That  he  entertained 
a  view  of  the  meaning  of  that  part  of  the  service  diflerent  from  that 

93  Bishop  White's  Memoirs,  pp.  104,  155, 


406  APPENDIX. 

of  Bishop  White,  is  evident  from  his  writings.  As  it  does  not 
appear,  however,  that  the  view  of  Bishop  Seabury  was  held  by  any 
other  persons  in  the  Convention,  and  as  it  does  appear  that  Bishop 
White  would  have  "  zealously  opposed  the  admission  of  such  un- 
evangelical  sentiments,"  if  that  portion  of  the  service  "  could  have 
been  thought  reasonably  to  imply  them,"  (whicJi  leads  us  to  infer 
that  his  opposition  would  have  been  manifested  had  he  ascertained 
that  any  members  in  the  Convention  believed  tiiat  it  did  imply  such 
sentiments,)  we  can  regard  this  opinion  of  Bishop  Seabury  only  as 
an  individual  one,  not  sanctioned  by  the  Church,  and  not  in  reality 
contained  in  the  service  whose  introduction  he  advocated  in  the 
belief  that  it  was  there  contained. 

It  is  but  just,  however,  to  the  memory  of  Bishop  Seabury,  to  say, 
that  while  he  regarded  the  Eucharist  as  a  sacrifice,  he  utterly  re- 
jected the  idea  of  the  bodily  presence  of  Christ  in  any  sense  in  the 
Sacrament.  The  following  passages,  from  a  sermon  on  the  suliject, 
will  confirm  both  these  statements: 

"It  appears,  therefore,  that  the  Eucharist  is  not  only  a  Sacrament 
in  which,  under  the  symbols  of  bread  and  wine,  according  to  the 
institution  of  Christ,  the  faithful  truly  and  spiritually  receive  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ;  but,  also,  a  true  and  proper  sacrifice, 
commemorative  of  the  original  sacrifice  and  death  of  Christ  for  our 
deliverance  from  sin  and  death,  a  memorial  made  before  God,  to 
put  him  in  mind — that  is,  to  plead  with  him  the  meritorious  sacri- 
fice and  death  of  his  dear  Son,  for  the  forgiveness  of  our  sins,  for 
the  santtification  of  his  Church,  for  a  happy  resurrection  from 
death,  and  a  glorious  immortality  with  Christ  in  heaven. 

"  From  this  account  the  Priesthood  of  the  Christian  Church  evi- 
dently appears.  As  a  Priest,  Christ  offered  himself  a  sacrifice  to 
God  in  the  mystery  of  the  Eucharist — that  is,  under  the  .symbols  of 
bread  and  wme ;  and  he  commanded  his  apostles  to  do  as  he  had 
done.  If  his  offering  were  a  sacrifice,  theirs  was  also.  His  sacrifice 
was  original,  theirs  commemorative.  His  was  meritorious  through 
his  merit  who  oflTered  it;  theirs  drew  all  its  merit  from  the  relation 
it  had  to  his  sacrifice  and  appointment.  His,  from  the  excellency 
of  its  own  natui-e,  was  a  true  and  sufficient  propitiation  for  the  sins 
of  the  whole  world  ;  theirs  procures  remission  of  sins  only  througli 
the  reference  it  has  to  his  atonement. 


APPENDIX. 


407 


"  When  Christ  commanded  his  apostles  lo  celebrate  the  Holy 
Eucharist  in  remembrance  of  him,  he  with  the  command  gave  them 
power  to  do  so — that  is,  he  communicated  his  own  Priesthood  to 
them  in  such  measure  and  degree  as  he  saw  necessary  for  his 
Church,  to  qualify  them  to  be  his  representatives  to  oifer  the  Chris- 
tian sacrifice  of  bread  and  wine,  as  a  memorial  before  God  the 
Father  of  his  offering  iiimself  once  for  all;  of  his  passion  and  of  his 
death,  to  render  the  Mmighly  propitious  to  us  for  his  sake  ;  and  as  a 
means  of  obtaining,  through  faith  in  him,  all  the  blessings  and 
benefits  of  his  redemption."  -' 

The  reader  will  notice,  in  the  next  passage,  the  decided  disavowal 
of  the  beUef  of  any  bodily  presence,  which  is  contained  in  the  last 
two  sentences. 

"There  is,  therefore,  in  this  holy  institution,  no  ground  for  the 
errors  of  Transubstantiation,  Consubstantiation,  or  the  bodily  pres- 
ence of  Christ,  with  which  the  Church  of  Rome,  Luther,  and  Cal- 
vin, have  deceived,  beguiled,  and  perplexed  the  Church.  The  bread 
and  wine  are,  in  their  nature,  still  bread  and  wine;  they  are  not 
transubstantiated  into  the  natural  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  as  the 
Papists  teach;  the  natural  body  and  blood  of  Christ  are  not  consub- 
stantiated  with  them,  so  as  to  make  one  substance,  as  the  Lutherans 
teach;  nor  are  the  natural  body  and  blood  of  Christ  infused  into 
them,  nor  hovering  over  them,  so  as  to  be  confusedly  received  witli 
them,  as  Calvin  and  his  followers  seem  to  teach,  for  they  are  far 
from  being  intelligible  on  the  subject.  The  natural  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  are  in  heaven,  in  glory  and  exaltation;  we  receive  them  not  in 
the  Communion  in  any  sense.  The  bread  and  wine  are  his  body  and 
blood,  sacramentally  and  by  representation.''''^^ 

The  opinions  of  Bishop  Seabury  on  the  Eucharist  as  a  sacrifice, 
will  have  more  force  with  the  reader's  mind,  if  he  simply  read  this 
statement  of  them,  than  if  he  examine  the  reasons  for  them  which 
he  has  advanced  in  ,the  commencement  of  the  sermon  from  which 
these  passages  are  taken.     A  conclusion  based  upon  the  position' 


24  Seabury's  Sermons,  vol.  i,  pp.  177,  178 

25  Seabury-'i  Sermons,  vol.  i,  p.  179. 


408  APPENDIX. 

that  Christ  did  not  offer  himself  on  the  cross,^^  and  did  offer  himself  in 
the  Eucharist,  a  propilialorij  sacrifice  for  sin,''''  cannot  stand. "'^ 

As  the  sentiments  of  Bishop  Seabury  on  the  subject  of  the  Com- 
jTiunion  are  said  by  Bishop  Wiiite  to  have  been  adopted  by  him  in 
consequence  of  his  visit  to  the  Scotch  Bishops,  the  following  account 
of  the  Communion  Office  of  that  Clmrch  will  interest  the  reader. 
It  will  be  seen  by  the  reader  to  differ,  not  only  from  the  service  of 
Edward,  but  also  in  important  particulars  from  our  own. 

"During  the  periods  when  the  government,  by  Archbishops  and 
Bishops,  was  legally  established  in  the  Church  of  that  country,  no 
Liturgical  service  or  Book  of  Common  Prayer  was  enjoined  by  au- 
thority or  generally  in  use;  the  well-known  attempt  to  introduce 
such  a  book  in  the  year  1637  having  completely  failed,  and  origina- 
ted the  civil  wars  which  ended  in  the  destruction  of  the  Church  and 
the  monarchy.  At  the  revolution,  by  far  the  greater  part  of  the 
Ministers  of  parishes  retained  their  livings;  and,  in  fact,  there  was 
no  essential  difference  in  the  form  or  mode  of  worship  between  them 
and  the  Presbyterians,  whatever  differences  there  were  in  other  re* 
spects.  The  Bishops  and  others,  who  did  not  conform  to  the  legal 
establishment  of  Presbytery,  began  about  twenty  years  after  the 
revolution,  to  adopt  the  use  of  the  Church  of  England  Prayer-Book; 
and  about  the  same  time  the  act  of  Q.ueen  Anne,  1712,  allowed  all 
Episcopalian  clergymen,  who  used  it,  and  took  the  oaths  as  loyal 
subjects,  to  be  tolerated  and  protected  in  their  places  of  worship. 
Thus  there  would  have  existed  no  visible  mark  of  any  r dig ioiis  dif- 

2G  III.,  p.  169.  27Id.,  p.  173. 

23  One  woiililliave  thouglitlliat  the  palpable  contradiction  of  this  statement  to 
that  of  the  Prayer  of  Consecration,  would  have  prevented  Bishop  Seabury  haz 
arding  a  statement  so  readily  seen  by  all  to  be  eontrary  to  the  language  of  the 
Church:  "Almighty  God,  our  heavenly  Father,  who  of  thy  tender  mercy  diilst 
give  thine  only  Son,  Jesus  Christ,  to  suffer  death  uponthc  cross  for  our  redemp- 
tion, who  made  there  (by  his  one  oblation  ofhimsulfoitce  offered)  a  full,  perfect, 
and  sufficient  sacrifice,  oblation,  and  satisfaction  for  the  sins  of  the  whole 
world."  Surely,  in  these  words,  the  Church  has  provided  an  emphatic  testi- 
mony against  all  such  representations  of  tlie  oblation  and  Invocation  as  would 
'mply  that,  in  any  sense,  Christ's  sacrifice  was  again  to  ba  offered,  or  that  it 
needed — being  already  full,  -perfect,  and  suffteient — any  commemorative  re-of 
fering,  "to  render  the  Mmighty  propitious  to  us  for  his  sake," 


APPENDIX  409 

ferencc  between  the  tolerated  and  the  non-tolerated  Episcopalians, 
{ihc poMcal  difference  being,  that  till  the  death  of  the  Pretender  in 
1788,  the  latter  did  not  pray  for  King  George,)  had  it  not  become 
the  custom  of  the  Scottish  Bishops  and  their  flocks  to  use,  along 
with  the  English  Liturgy,  a  different  Communion  Service  from  that 
contained  in  it,  being  that  which  they  found  in  the  'Old  Scotch 
Prayer-Book'  of  1637;  of  which  service  various  editions  were  print- 
ed and  used  along  with  the  copies  of  the  English  Common  Prayer- 
Book,  but  containing  important  changes  or  variations,  both  from  the 
Prayer-Book  of  1637,  and  from  each  other,  as  will  be  shown.  Of 
the  English  Prayer-Book  with  this  Scotch  Communion  Office  as  an 
integral  part  of  it,  no  edition  has  been  printed,  as  far  as  is  known. 

"It  could  only,  therefore,  be  from  the  separate  editions  of  the 
Scotch  Office,  that  the  exact  statements  which  it  contains,  are  avail* 
able,  had  not  there  appeared  an  authenticated  copy  of  it,  as  acknow- 
ledged for  many  years  by  the  Episcopal  Church  of  Scotland.  This 
occurs  in  'a  collation  of  the  several  communion  Offices  in  the  Prayer- 
Book  of  Edward  VI,  the  Scotch  Prayer-Book  of  the  year  1637,  the 
present  English  Prayer-Book,  and  that  used  in  the  present  Scotch 
Episcopal  Church. — London,  printed  in  the  year  1792.'  To  this  tract 
the  following  preface  is  given.  'The  following  collation  was  made 
by  a  divine  of  the  Established  Church  of  England,  high  in  situation, 
at  first  with  a  view  to  nothing  more  than  his  own  private  satisfac- 
tion. It  is  now,  with  his  permission,  printed  and  dispersed,  in  order 
to  confute  certain  false  and  malicious  insinuations  which  have  been 
circulated  concerning  the  present  practices  of  the  Episcopalians  in 
Scotland,  with  an  evident  intention  to  injure  them  in  the  esteem  of 
the  British  legislature.  That  the  Liturgy  now  in  use  among  the 
Scotch  Episcopalians  is  precisely  the  same  with  the  present  Com- 
mon Prayer-Book  of  the  Established  Church  of  England,  except  in 
the  Communion  Office,  and  that  the  variations  found  there  are  those, 
and  those  only,  which  are  exhibited  in  this  collation,  is  attested  by 
John  Skinner,  Bishop  'and  Delegate  of  the  Scotch  Episcopal 
Church.— London,  March  30lh,  1792.' 

"Bishop  John  Skinner,  then  and  till  his  death  holding  the  rank  of 
Primus  among  his  brethren,  was  in  London  at  the  above  period  so, 
liciting  the  passing  of  the  Relief  Bill  for  the  Scottish  Episcopaliansi 
18 


410 


APPENDIX. 


which  became  an  act  of  Parliament  in  August,  1792,  and  relieved  that 
body  from  civil  penalties,  on  condition  of  their  clergymen  taking  the 
oaths  to  Government,  subscribing  the  thirty-nine  articles  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  continuing  to  pray  for  the  reigning  family. 
In  a  letter  to  Bishop  Gleig,  many  years  afterwards.  Bishop  Skinner 
states  that  he  put  his  name,  'at  Bishop  Horsley's  desire,  to  what  he 
(Bishop  Horsley)  had  prepared  as  a  preface  to  his  collation  of  the 
Communion  Offices,'  &c.^'' 

"Such  a  document  will  surely  be  received  as  evidence  of  what  the 
present  Scotch  Communion  Office  really  is;  and  the  differences  be- 
tween it  and  the  older  Scotch  Office,  and  that  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, eu-e  now  to  be  stated. 

"There  is  a  'Prayer  of  Oblation,'  which  follows  the  Prayer  of 
Consecration  of  the  sacramental  elements.  The  Church  of  England 
Prayer-Book  contains  no  prayer  of  oblation. 

"1.  The  words  in  tiiis  Prayer  of  Oblation  Hvhichwe  now  offer  unto 
Thee,''  are  not  to  be  found  in  the  Prayer-Book  of  Edward  VI,  nor 
in  the  Old  Scotch  Prayer-Book  of  1637.  They  imply  a  direct 
offering  of  the  bread  and  wine  as  a  sacrifice ;  and  in  order  to  show 
their  importance,  they  are  printed  in  capital  letters  in  several  editions 
of  the  office,  as  in  those  printed  in  1755  and  1801. 

"2.  In  the  Prayer  of  consecration  contained  in  the  Prayer-Book 
of  Edward  VI,  the  Old  Scotch  of  1G37,  and  the  present  Church  of 
England,  there  are  the  words — '  By  his  one  oblation  of  himself  once 
offered;'  but  in  the  present  Scotch  Communion  Office  they  are 
changed  to  'By  his  oivn  oblation  of  himself  once  offered.' 

"  The  intention  of  this  alteration  is  plainly  to  allow  of  more  ob- 
lations than  one,  and  thus  avoid  the  apparent  inconsistency  between 
the  one  great  sacrifice  of  the  Saviour,  and  the  subsequent  offerings 
of  sacrifice  in  the  sacramental  elements.  The  whole  meaning  is 
changed  from  the  single  sacrifice  of  Christ  on  the  cross,  so  as  to 
admit  the  possibility  of  other  sacrifices  existing  besides  the  full  and 
perfect  one  made  by  himself 

"3.  In  the  present  English  Prayer-Book  there  are,  in  the  Prayer 
of  Consecration,  the  following  words :  '  Hear  us,  0  merciful  Father' 

S9  Annais  of  Scottish  Episcopacy,  from  1788  to  1816.  By  the  Rev.  John  Skin- 
nier, A.  M.,  Forfar(son  of  Biihop  Skinner,)  p.  486. 


APPENDIX.  411 

we  most  humbly  beseech  thee;  and  grant  that  we,  receiving  these 
thy  creatures  of  bread  and  wine,  according  to  thy  Son  our  Saviour 
Jesus  ChrisCs  holy  institution,  in  remembrance  of  his  death  and  pas- 
sion, may  be  partakers  of  his  most  blessed  body  and  blood.' 

"  In  the  Prayer-Book  of  Edward  VI,  the  corresponding  passage, 
is:  'Hear  us,  0  merciful  Father,  we  most  humbly  beseech  thee; 
and  with  thy  Holy  Spirit  and  Word  vouchsafe  to  bl-fess  and 
sanc-f-tify  these  thy  gifts  and  creatures  of  bread  and  wine,  that  they 
may  be^"  unto  us  the  body  and  blood  of  thy  most  dearly  beloved 
Son  Jesus  Christ.'^' 

"  In  the  old  Scotch  Prayer-Book,  the  corresponding  passage  is  : 
'  Heare  us,  0  merciful  Father,  we  most  humbly  beseech  thee,  and 
of  thy  Almighty  goodnesse  vouchsafe  so  to  blesse  and  sanctifie  with 
thy  Word  and  Holy  Spirit  these  thy  gifts  and  creatures  of  bread 
and  wine,  that  they  may  bee  unto  us  the  body  and  blood  of  thy 
most  dearly  beloved  Son  ;  so  that  we,  receiving  them  according  to 
thy  Sonne  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ's  holy  institution,  in  remem- 
brance of  his  death  and  passion,^'  may  be  partakers  of  the  same,^-* 
his  most  precious^*  body  and  blood.' 

30  In  Dr.  Thomas  Brett's  Collection  of"  The  Principal  Liturgies  used  by  ihe 
Christian  Church  in  the  celebration  of  the  Holy  Eucharist,"  London,  1720,  the 
words  in  this  part  are  "  may  be  made  to  us."  Dr.  Brett  was  one  of  the  princi- 
pal English  mn-jurors  of  his  Urae.  Both  Bishop  Horseley  and  Bishop  Burnet 
[History  ii,  76,)  state  the  words  as  above. 

31  It  has  long  been  customary  for  the  defenders  of  the  present  Scotch  Office 
to  slate  that  it  is  the  same  or  nearly  so  with  Edward  Vl's  Prayer-Book,  framed 
by  Ridley  and  others.  Hence  the  necessity  of  exhibiting  the  exact  difference 
between  iheni,  which  all  these  writers  fail  to  notice. 

32  The  words  "  in  remembrance  of  his  death  and  passion,"  are  omitted  in 
Horsley's  Collation,  and  no  blank  space  is  left  to  indicate  that  they  are  in  the 
prayer. 

33  The  words  "the  same"  are  also  omitted  by  Horsley. 

34  In  Horsley's  Collation  the  word  "blessed"  is  substituted  for  "  precious.-' 
These  errors  in  Bishop  Horsley's  CoUaiion,  attested  by  Bishop  Skmner,  would 
be  of  very  small  importance,  were  not  the  whole  subject  complicated  wit.'i 
similar  mistakes.  Even  in  transcribing  the  corresponding  passage  from  the 
Church  of  England  Prayer-Book,  Horeley  hat  left  out  the  important  phrase 
"  in  remembrance  of  his  death  and  passion  ;"  omitting,  at  the  same  lime,  all  or 
any  kind  of  reference  to  tliese  words  existing  in  two  of  the  four  offices  collated 
and  wanting  in  the  other  two.  Yet  surely  they  are  of  importance;  the  Sa- 
viour's command  is,  '•'  Do  ihis  in  remembrance  of  me." 


412  APPENDIX. 

"  In  the  present  Scotch  Communion  Office,  there  is  no  correspond- 
ing passage  in  the  Consecration  Prayer,  it  being  removed  to  the 
Prayer  of  Oblation,  which  follows  the  former,  altered  in  important 
particulars,  and  denominated  in  the  margin  'The Invocation.'' 

"  'And  we  most  humbly  beseech  Thee,  0  merciful  Father,  to  hear 
us,  and,  of  thy  Almighty  goodness,  vouchsafe  to  bless  and  sanctify, 
with  thy  Word  and  Holy  Spirit,  these  thy  gifts  and  creatures  of 
bread  and  wine,  that  they  may  become  the  body  and  blood  of  thy 
most  dearly  beloved  Son.' 

"4.  When  the  above  transference  was  made  of  the  Invocation  from 
the  Prayer  of  Consecration  to  that  of  Oblation,  it  will  be  observed 
that  the  following  passage  was  left  out: '  So  that  we,  receiving  them 
according  to  thy  Son  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ's  holy  institution,  in 
remembrance  of  his  death  and  passion,  may  be  partakers  of  the 
same,  his  most  precious  body  and  blood.' 

"  These  words  contain  an  express  reference  to  the  receiving  of  the 
elements  in  such  a  way  as  shall  be  according  to  the  terms  of  the  Di- 
vine institution  of  the  Communion,  and  of  its  being  a  commemora- 
tion of  Christ.  The  omission  of  them,  contained  as  they  are  in  the 
old  Scotch  Prayer-Book,  is  significant  enough  of  the  intention  of  the 
framers  of  the  alteration,  to  give  all  the  support  in  their  power  to 
the  doctrine  of  a  real  presence  of  the  Saviour  in  the  bread  and  wine, 
and  to  the  offering  of  these  elements  in  some  kind  of  sacrifice.  Com- 
pare this  omission  and  its  tendency  with  the  Church  of  England 
service,  with  the  whole  tenor  of  that  service,  or  with  the  XXXIst 
Article  of  the  Church,  which  boldly  designates  every  kind  of  offer- 
ing, but  that  of '  Christ  once  made,'  'blasphemous  fables  and  danger- 
ous deceits.' 

"  5.  This  conclusion  will  not  appear  the  less  obvious  when  a  still 
more  important  alteration  in  the  transferred  passage,  or  Invocation, 
is  attended  to.  This  is  the  change  from  the  words  '  that  they  (the 
bread  and  wine)  may  be  to  us  the  body  and  blood,"  into  the  words, 
4  that  they  may  become  the  body  and  blood.' 

"  In  this  alteration  much  is  involved.  For  it  is  to  be  taken  in 
connection  with  the  other  alterations  above  specified,  all  of  which 
point  towards  a  distinct  or  separate  offering  up  or  sacnjice  of  the 


APPENDIX.  413 

sacramental  elements,  in  addition  to  the  one  sacrifice  of  Christ  by 
himself. 

"The  omission  of  the  words  'to  ws,' evidently  leaves  complete 
room  to  infer  that  there  takes  place  a  change  of  the  bread  and  wine, 
(not  as  these  elements  are  received  by  the  communicants,  but,) 
truly,  absolutely,  independently  of  their  being  used;  in  short,  as 
existing  in  themselves,  with  something  else,  which,  if  not  real  flesh 
and  blood,  is  left  undefined,  and  therefore  in  such  language  as  to 
allow  of  the  whole  essence  of  Transubstantiation  being  most  easily 
engrafted  on  the  words,  may  become  the  body  and  blood,^  both  in  the 
literal  meaning  and  in  the  spirit  of  that  Popish  doctrine. 

"Then,  the  words  'to  its,'  are  in  King  Edward  VI's  and  the  old 
Scotch  Prayer-Book,  and  why  all  omission  of  them  here  ?  King 
Edward's  Pi'aycr-Book  was  the  first  established  book  of  Common 
Prayer  in  England  ;  and,  in  order  to  make  the  transition  from  the 
Roman  Catholic  to  the  Protestant  religion  as  moderate  as  possible, 
and  thus  reconcile  a  greater  number  to  the  change,  its  compilers 
allowed  the  word  '  Mass'  to  stand  as  the  title  of  the  Communion 
Service.  But  they  inserted  the  words  '6e  to  its;'  and  it  is  well  known, 
from  their  numerous  writings,  what  idea  they  attached  to  them,  and 
how  opposed  they  were  to  every  variety  of  Transubstantiation.  In 
a  few  years  afterwards,  on  modelling  the  present  Prayer-Book,  all 
invocation  was  discontinued."^^ 

35  Comparison  between  the  Communion  Offices  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and  the  Scottish  Episcopal  Church,  pp.  12-21. 


DATE  DUE 


** 5* •r..^.  ,.„„.. 

GAYLORD  #3523PI        Printed  in  USA 


,.ef°**^^ 


